Off-topic Talk Where overpaid, underworked S2000 owners waste the worst part of their days before the drive home. This forum is for general chit chat and discussions not covered by the other off-topic forums.

Splenda

Thread Tools
 
Old May 4, 2005 | 08:42 PM
  #11  
JettaGT's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Default

my step mom is diabetic, i know she uses splenda but also check some diabetic cook books
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 01:12 AM
  #12  
Daniel L's Avatar
Registered User
20 Year Member
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,451
Likes: 1
From: LA, CA - Durham, NC
Default

I tried it just for the heck of it and it tasted pretty good in my iced tea.
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 02:17 AM
  #13  
jiggagnome's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by honda606,May 4 2005, 08:16 AM
Splenda is almost as bad for you as aspartame. All it is is chlorinated hydrocarbons or chlorocarbons.

Splenda IS NOT made from Sugar as they claim and there is now a lawsuit against the makers of Splenda by the Sugar industry for making such a claim. In reality one of the thousands of chemicals that make up Sucralose is derived from Sugar so that's how they've managed to make the claim for so long.

Here's a few links to show you the wonderful qualities of Sucralose(Splenda), NutraSweet, Sweet&Low, etc.

Hope you enjoy kidney stones!

http://www.wnho.net/splenda.htm

http://www.holisticmed.com/splenda/
Your information you post is as reliable as any other garbage on the internet, if it was a scientific journal then it has merit, otherwise any jo shmO can post nonsense on a website and state it as facts, I see NO sources for his information, and the information provided doesnt flow right at all, "Moreover, the rats so fed were only 7-20% underweight Vs the average for the control group. Rats who are severely starved to create a 30% weight loss, only shrink their thymus by an average of 7%. " WHAT??? Random numbers thrown into a sentence? These numbers state that rats fed through gastric gavage are 7-20% underweight and that rats severely starved created a 30% weight loss, wiht a 7% shrinkage of the thymus, which has nothing to do with sucralose or "chlorocarbons".

The article goes on to say "What you need to know about sucralose is that it is of a class of compounds which places it amongst some of the most dangerous chemicals on earth" IM ABSOLUTELY STUMPED WHY IM STILL ALIVE AFTER READING THIS, LET ALONE FULLY HEALTHY!!!, I eat the most dangerous chemical on earth every morning since it was released yet im not dead???????????????????????????????????????

Sorry if this came out as a flame, but I am so sick of all the misinformation on the internet, very well done websites convince people of very untrue things, especially when it comes to "organic" food. I wont even get started on that propoganda.
It is possible that sucralose could have unknown side effects but their are PLENTY OF KNOWN side effects for things we all do on a regular basis, like fill our tanks with gas full of MTBE, when alternatives are readily available. There are much more serious life threatening things out there than SPLENDA!

sorry its 3 in the morning and i have a biochem test tomorrow
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 02:20 AM
  #14  
VTEC_Junkie's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 4,709
Likes: 1
From: Berkeley
Default

just bake a huge basket of brownies for the non diabetics, and place a bowl of celery sticks next to it for the diabetics...
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 09:22 AM
  #15  
honda606's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 5,937
Likes: 7
From: houston
Default

Originally Posted by jiggagnome,May 5 2005, 04:17 AM
Your information you post is as reliable as any other garbage on the internet, if it was a scientific journal then it has merit, otherwise any jo shmO can post nonsense on a website and state it as facts, I see NO sources for his information, and the information provided doesnt flow right at all, "Moreover, the rats so fed were only 7-20% underweight Vs the average for the control group. Rats who are severely starved to create a 30% weight loss, only shrink their thymus by an average of 7%. " WHAT??? Random numbers thrown into a sentence? These numbers state that rats fed through gastric gavage are 7-20% underweight and that rats severely starved created a 30% weight loss, wiht a 7% shrinkage of the thymus, which has nothing to do with sucralose or "chlorocarbons".

The article goes on to say "What you need to know about sucralose is that it is of a class of compounds which places it amongst some of the most dangerous chemicals on earth" IM ABSOLUTELY STUMPED WHY IM STILL ALIVE AFTER READING THIS, LET ALONE FULLY HEALTHY!!!, I eat the most dangerous chemical on earth every morning since it was released yet im not dead???????????????????????????????????????

Sorry if this came out as a flame, but I am so sick of all the misinformation on the internet, very well done websites convince people of very untrue things, especially when it comes to "organic" food. I wont even get started on that propoganda.
It is possible that sucralose could have unknown side effects but their are PLENTY OF KNOWN side effects for things we all do on a regular basis, like fill our tanks with gas full of MTBE, when alternatives are readily available. There are much more serious life threatening things out there than SPLENDA!

sorry its 3 in the morning and i have a biochem test tomorrow
Too much science has warped your brain. Try using some deductive logic and reasoning.

I don't have to worry about MTBE's as I have a water purification system in my home; good point though.

I'd love to discuss why you consider "organic" as being propaganda. I find that extremely humorous and is honestly the first time I've ever heard someone make such a claim.

How about providing a link to a "scientific journal" showing the safety of Splenda? You won't find it.
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 09:59 AM
  #16  
Monkei's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,098
Likes: 0
From: Kelowna, BC
Default

Originally Posted by Daniel L,May 5 2005, 01:12 AM
I tried it just for the heck of it and it tasted pretty good in my iced tea.
I believe Splenda is meant to replace sugar in situations like this (stirring into iced tea, sprinkling over fresh fruit, etc.), but does make for a very good sugar substitute when it comes to baking (brownies, cakes, etc.).
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 11:23 AM
  #17  
steven975's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 5,094
Likes: 6
From: Vienna, VA
Default

actually it is the only sugar substitute you CAN bake with, and it bakes well.

since it is built off of sugar (yes, it is!) it has many of the thermal properties of sugar.
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 11:59 AM
  #18  
jiggagnome's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Default

[QUOTE=honda606,May 5 2005, 09:22 AM] Too much science has warped your brain.
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 12:28 PM
  #19  
FO2K's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 912
Likes: 0
From: Fair Oaks
Default

Originally Posted by naomi-sarah,May 3 2005, 08:49 PM
I want to bake some goodies for the office, however, a few of my co-workers are diabetic. Is splenda safe? I know that it is "made from sugar" so I'm not 100% certain if it would be compatible for them.

Also, can you get it at any grocery store in the sugar/baking section? How much is it?

TIA.
Make two batches.
Reply
Old May 5, 2005 | 02:22 PM
  #20  
seminole2001's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,464
Likes: 0
Default

Bring on the Splenda Slurpee. It's friggin' hot here!!!
Reply



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:35 AM.