Quote:
Originally Posted by Amarantha
Re reading the labels, there's nothing (if I recall, I haven't had a box around here for awhile) on the Splenda label that says anything remotely like this may or may not adversely affect your health.
I suppose I should clarify by stating I meant that people should read the labels on *other* products to ensure that ingredients that they personally consider undesirable - which might or might not include Splenda (sucralose) - and decide for themselves whether or not they want to buy said product.
It comes back to
personal responsibility IMO.
As far as the sugar industry's lawsuit is concerned, that's strictly a matter of dollars and cents to them. I doubt if it's the alleged 'insinuation' of 'naturalness' that is bugging the powers that be in the sugar industry - it's the combination of the advertising slogan "Made like sugar so it tastes like sugar" and the overwhelming popularity of Splenda, that is getting their knickers in a twist, IMO. To the best of my recollection, no other sugar subsititute has gone on record as claiming to taste like sugar, and that's really got them T.O.'d. (Sugar actually isn't the natural product that the industry implies it to be - chemicals such as lime, polyacrylamide, and phosphoric acid are used in the refining process.)
Seems to me that the sugar industry would rather take the spotlight away from the fact that the overconsumpution of sugar and HFCS have played a huge role in the health crisis facing America and the world at large today - instead they would rather cast doubt on Splenda, and I'm sure any other sugar substitute that comes down the pike (yup, I'm sure that there are more sugar substitutes being developed as we speak).
Just my two cents. Again - it comes down to - if you don't like it, you don't have to use it.
