No announcement yet.

Australia report 2001 finds arsenic in sucralose at 15 % of EPA ADI limits, lead 67 %

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Australia report 2001 finds arsenic in sucralose at 15 % of EPA ADI limits, lead 67 %

    Australia official report 2001.12.10 finds arsenic impurity in sucralose at 15 % of USA EPA adult ADI limits for daily drinking water, also 67 % of child lead alarm limits -- evidence for claims by D.L. Dewey and G.N. Ferebee petition (some typos): Murray 2007.10.25

    Sucralose has substantial arsenic and lead impurities.

    [ The European Union ADI for sucralose is 15 mg/kg body weight, 1,050 mg = 1.05 gm for a 70 kg average adult, with the result that the additional increase of 15 % of USA EPA adult arsenic ADI and 20 % of USA EPA child lead alarm levels would entail an additional risk for people in vulnerable groups, some of whom are bound to be using even higher levels for years.

    If a hundred million use sucralose, and 0.1 %, one in a thousand, are heavy, long-term users and especially vulnerable, that would be 100,000 people at risk. ]

    [ This report from Australia is the first specific data I found so far. It indicates levels of arsenic, lead, and methanol that might be bad for very vulnerable groups who use very high levels of sucralose for years.

    I found it while searching Google for referenced evidence for dramatic sucralose toxicity claims in a recent public petition by D. L. Dewey and Greta Nuernberger Ferebee.]

    File No: NA/944 November 2001

    10 December, 2001 FULL PUBLIC REPORT NA/944 5/24

    Calculated on the anhydrous basis
    Degree of Purity: 98.0-102.0 %

    Hazardous Impurities:

    Chemical name: Arsenic (as As)
    CAS No.: 7440-38-2
    Weight percentage: Less than 3 mg/kg
    [ One gram sucralose would give up to 3 micrograms arsenic. ]
    Toxic properties: Toxic (T) by inhalation (R23) and if swallowed (R25)

    Chemical name: Heavy metals (as Pb)

    Weight percentage: 10 mg/kg or less
    [ One gram sucralose would give up to 10 micrograms lead. ]
    Toxic properties: Toxic (T), may cause harm to the unborn child (R61), possible risk of impaired fertility (R62), harmful by inhalation (R20) and if swallowed (R22), danger of cumulative effects (R33).

    Chemical name: Methanol
    Synonyms: Methyl alcohol
    CAS No.: 67-56-1
    Weight percentage: 0.1 % or less
    [ One gram sucralose would give 1.0 mg methanol -- whereas in most people the daily ingestion of methanol is about 10 mg daily.
    One gram aspartame, five 12-oz cans diet soda, gives 110 mg methanol. ]
    Toxic properties: Toxic (T) by inhalation (R23) and if swallowed (R25)

    Non-hazardous Impurities ( > 1% by weight ):

    Chemical name: 4-chloro-4-deoxygalactose
    Synonyms: 4-CG
    Weight percentage: Very low
    CAS No.:

    Chemical name: 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxyfructose
    Synonyms: 1,6-DCF
    Weight percentage: Very low

    Additives/Adjuvants: None

    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signaled on October 31, 2001 that it will be reducing the amount of arsenic allowed in US drinking water from a maximum of 50 parts per billion (50 ppb) back to the tighter 10 ppb standard adopted in the final days of the Clinton administration.

    [ For adult drinking water 2 liters/day average, the USA EPA arsenic limit is 10 ppb = .01 ppm = .01 mg per kg = .01 mg per liter, giving .02 mg = 20 micrograms arsenic limit.

    So, 3 micrograms arsenic daily from 1 gram of sucralose in a variety of products is 0.15 = 15 % of the USA EPA alarm limit for adults. ]


    Schools and child care facilities that have their own water supply and are considered non-transient, non-community water systems (NTNCWSs) are subject to the Lead and Copper Rule (LCR) requirements.

    The LCR was developed to protect public health by minimizing lead and copper levels in drinking water.

    The most common source of lead and copper in drinking water is corrosion of plumbing materials.

    Plumbing materials that can be made with lead and copper include pipes, solder, fixtures, and faucets.

    The LCR established an action level of 0.015 mg/L (15 ppb) for lead
    and 1.3 mg/L (1300 ppb) for copper
    based on the 90th percentile level of tap water samples.

    This means no more than 10 percent of your samples
    can be above either action level.

    If lead or copper levels are found above the action levels,
    it does not signal a violation
    but can trigger other requirements that include
    water quality parameter (WQP) monitoring,
    corrosion control treatment (CCT),
    source water monitoring/treatment,
    public education,
    and lead service line replacement.

    [ For child drinking water of 1 liter/day average,
    15 ppb = .015 ppm = .015 mg per kg = .015 mg per lite = 15 micrograms lead alarm limit.

    So, 10 micrograms daily from 1 gram of sucralose in a variety of products is 0.67 = 67 % of the EPA alarm limit for lead in children. ]


    Children are especially susceptible to lead and copper exposure because their bodies absorb these metals at higher rates than the average adult. Children younger than six are most at risk due to their rapid rate of growth. Exposure to high levels of lead can cause damage to the brain, red blood cells, and kidneys. Exposure to even low levels of lead can cause low IQ, hearing impairment, reduced attention span, and poor classroom performance. Exposure to high levels of copper can cause stomach and intestinal distress, liver or kidney damage, and complications of Wilson???„?s disease in genetically predisposed people.

    Because children spend so much time in school and child care facilities and their bodies are developing rapidly, it is important to provide safe drinking water to avoid health problems linked to lead or copper exposure.


    High lead levels in adults have been linked to increased blood-pressure. Pregnant women and their fetuses are especially vulnerable to lead exposure since lead can significantly harm the fetus, causing lower birth weight and slowing down normal mental and physical development.


    When lead and copper are found in tap water it is typically due to leaching from internal plumbing materials. If the water is too corrosive, it can cause lead or copper to leach out of the plumbing materials and enter the drinking water.

    The potential for leaching increases the longer the water is in contact with the plumbing components. School water supplies tend to have extended periods of no water use (e.g., overnight, weekends, holidays, summer) that increase the likelihood of elevated lead levels at the tap.

    In 2000, the European Union Scientific Committee on Food (SCF) assessed the data on the safety of sucralose and concluded that sucralose is acceptable as a sweetener for general food use
    and set an Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of 0-15 mg/kg body weight.

    [ The European Union ADI for sucralose is as much as up to 1,050 mg = 1.05 gm for a 70 kg average adult, with the result that the additional increase of 15 % of USA EPA adult arsenic ADI and 20 % of USA EPA child lead alarm levels would entail an additional risk for people in vulnerable groups, some of whom are bound to be using even higher levels for years.

    If a hundred million use sucralose, and 0.1 %, one in a thousand, are heavy, long-term users and especially vulnerable, that would be 100,000 people at risk. ]

    [ Continued ]
    Send blank post to: <br /> to join<br />free,open, list with searchable archives for toxicity issues.<br />Richard \"Rich\" T. Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, NM 87505<br /> 505-501-2298

  • #2
    C.W. Sham praises sucralose in 2005, citing 4 industry funded studies

    [ Continued ]

    [ C. W. Sham praises sucralose, citing just four industry funded human studies on small groups at low doses for 17 days, 13 weeks, and 3 months. ]

    Nutrition Bytes [ not in PubMed ]
    Volume 10, Issue 2 2005 Article 5
    Splenda - A Safe and Sweet Alternative to Sugar
    Caroline W. Sham
    David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA,
    Copyright 2005 by the authors, unless otherwise noted.
    This article is part of the collected
    publications of Nutrition Bytes.
    Nutrition Bytes is produced by the eScholarship Repository
    and bepress.
    Produced by eScholarship Repository, 2007
    Department of Biological Chemistry, UCLA,
    David Geffen School of Medicine
    Nutrition Bytes
    University of California, Los Angeles
    ISSN: 1548-601X
    Editorial Board:
    Felice Kurtzman, M.P.H., R.D., Co-Chief Editor
    Eryn Ujita Lee, Ph.D., Co-Chief Editor
    Asst Adjt Prof 310-825-9356 Biol Chem 1445
    John Edmond, Ph.D.
    Leonard Rome, Ph.D.
    Rome, Leonard H.
    Sr Assoc Dean Res 310-825-868
    David Geffen Sch of Med, Ofc of the Dean 1400

    [ Excerpt ]


    The FDA has concluded that sucralose does not pose carcinogenic, reproductive, or neurological risks to human beings (8).

    So, what kind of direct evidence exists regarding sucralose safety?

    Baird et al. performed a pair of sucralose tolerance studies.

    The first was an observational study conducted on eight subjects over a period of 17 days with an ascending dose scheme (range 1-10 mg/kg body weight/day).

    The second was a multicenter, single-blind, randomized, controlled study on 118 subjects over 13 weeks, comparing repeated doses of sucralose (range 125-500 mg/day) to fructose.

    Neither study resulted in any positive hematologic, serum biochemistry, urinary, cardiac, or ophthalmologic findings.

    Sucralose was found to be well tolerated in single doses up to
    10 mg/kg/day and repeated doses increasing to 5 mg/kg/day for 13 weeks (9).

    So, there have been no documented adverse effects due to short-term sucralose consumption.

    Since diabetics are a group in need of sugar alternatives, human sucralose consumption has been studied in this population.

    A comparative observational study on 16 male subjects with well-controlled type 2 diabetes found that a diet incorporating fat
    replacers and sucralose yielded better improvements in metabolic and anthropometric variables, as compared to the currently recommended American Diabetic Association diet (10).

    A multi-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study on 128 obese subjects with type 2 diabetes examined the effects of sucralose on metabolic profiles as compared to placebo.

    There were no significant differences between the groups in
    measured HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, or fasting serum C-peptide, showing that sucralose consumption for 3 months at a dose of 7.5 mg/kg/day (estimated to be three times the average maximum intake) does not affect glucose homeostasis in type 2 diabetics (11).

    In summary, sucralose is well tolerated in both healthy and diabetic

    8. Food and Drug Administration. Food additives permitted for direct addition to food for human consumption; Sucralose. 1998, 21CFR172.64.

    9. Baird IM, Shephard NW, Merritt RJ, et al. Repeated Dose Study of Sucralose Tolerance in Human Subjects. Food and Chem Tox. 2000; 28: S123-129.
    I. McLean Baird a, N. W. Shephard b, R. J. Merritt c and G. Hildick-Smith d
    a Pine Court, Fairbourne, Cobham, Surrey KT11 2BT, UK
    Present address: Ross Labs, 151 South Parkview, Columbus, OH 43209, USA.
    b Medical Science Research, Brambles, Granborough, Bucks, MK18 3NT, UK
    c McNeil Specialty Products Company, 501 George St, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA
    d Johnson & Johnson, World Tower, One Plaza, New Brunswick, NJ 08903, USA

    10. Reyna NY, Cano C, Bermudez VJ, et al. Sweeteners and beta-glucans improve metabolic and anthropometrics variables in well controlled type 2 diabetic patients. Am J Ther. 2003; 10: 538- 43.
    Endocrine and Metabolic Research Center, Nutrition School, University of Zulia, Maracaibo, Venezuela.

    11. Grotz VL, Henry RR, McGill JB, et al. Lack of effect of sucralose on glucose homeostasis in subjects with type 2 diabetes. J Am Diet Assoc. 2003; 103: 1607-1612.
    Medical and Nutritional Affairs, McNeil Nutritionals, New Bruswick, NJ 08903-2400, USA.

    [ Continued ]
    Send blank post to: <br /> to join<br />free,open, list with searchable archives for toxicity issues.<br />Richard \"Rich\" T. Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, NM 87505<br /> 505-501-2298


    • #3
      typos in sucralose ban petition by D.L. Dewey and G.N. Ferebee

      [ Continued ]

      dldewey at

      "Sucalrose is contains these deadly chemicals, some known to cause cancer in animals, some are even listed on the EPA as poisons: Acetone - Acetic acid - Acetyl alcohol - Acetic anhydride - Ammonium chloride Benzene - Chlorinated Sulfates - Ethyl alcohol - Isobutyl Ketones - Formaldehyde - Hydrogen Chloride - Lithium Chloride -Methanol - Sodium methoxide - Sulfuryl chloride - Trityl chloride - Thionyl chloride - Toulene. Actually, a person is ingesting basically CHOLRINE when eating any foods containing sulcalrose."

      Hopefully, this petition will raise some needed ruckus, but it is also very easy for PR spin masters to discredit it by pointing out the misspelling of "sucralose" twice as "sucalrose", and the extraneous word "is", the second word in the sentence. A "-" is missing after Ammonium chloride. "Another example is MSG, monosodium glucomate..."
      Correct is monosodium glutamate.

      I myself, from serious brain injury at age 10, make so many typos that I have to proofread every sentence I type, as I go.
      I always double check.

      It is a grave error to use a fully capitalized common generic word, "CHOLRINE", misspelled to boot, in a public petition to a government official, which ensures that the petitioners will be automatically dismissed.

      Chlorine is a major element in every living creature, being half of table salt.

      Certainly, complex covalently bonded carbon compounds with chlorine atoms can be toxic, especially carbon tetrachloride, which does not cause its toxicity by releasing chlorine.

      I am not aware of any evidence that ingested sucralose releases significant levels of formaldehyde, methanol, and hydrogen chloride into bodies.

      These three chemicals are indeed normal metabolites in human bodies,
      which can be toxic in larger ingested doses over periods of time in vulnerable people.

      These three chemicals are not mentioned in the detailed approval by the FDA:

      Federal Register: April 3, 1998 (Volume 63, Number 64)
      Rules and Regulations
      Page 16417-16433
      From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access


      Food and Drug Administration

      21 CFR Part 172

      Docket No. 87F-0086

      Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human
      Consumption; Sucralose

      AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

      ACTION: Final rule.

      Dated: March 30, 1998.
      Michael A. Friedman,
      Lead Deputy Commissioner for the Food and Drug Administration.
      FR Doc. 98-8750 Filed 4-1-98; 8:45 am
      BILLING CODE 4160-01-F

      Here is a balanced, factual assessment by Whole Foods Market:

      Arguments against the use of sucralose:

      1. Sucralose is an artificial substance that is not found in nature, like aspartame and hydrogenated fats. Although supporters of sucralose claim that it is unable to be metabolized, up to 35% is absorbed by the body with a half life up to 23 hours.

      2. Pre-approval tests indicated potential toxicity for sucralose. One study (printed in the "New Scientist", 23 November 1991, volume 132, page 13) demonstrated that thymus weight decreased by up to 40% in rats fed diets rich in sucralose, indicating that sucralose has the potential to compromise the immune system. Note that the FDA also addressed this (and other) toxicity concerns in their Final Rule, claiming that these negative effects would not be seen in humans at recommended doses.

      3. Sucralose is a chlorinated compound. Other classes of chlorinated molecules include pesticides.

      4. There are no independent controlled human studies on sucralose. The bulk of the safety research has been conducted by the manufacturer.

      5. There are no long-term (>13 months) human studies of sucralose's effects and no long history of use.

      [ Wikipedia articles evolve by a constant dialog among contributors with different views. ]

      Chlorine atoms are covalently bonded to the carbon atoms in the sucralose molecule, making it a chlorocarbon.
      Although many chlorocarbons are toxic, sucralose is not known to be toxic in small quantities and is extremely insoluble in fat, so it can not accumulate in fat like most chlorinated hydrocarbons.
      In addition sucralose does not break down or dechlorinate.[16]

      However, it is well known numerous organochlorides are found in naturally occurring food sources such as seaweed.[17]
      In addition, polyvinyl chloride is a member of the organochloride family that has been commonly used to form pipes for conveying potable water for several decades.
      Given the ubiquity of these and other organochlorides and the absence of evidence of any harm caused by these organochlorides, chemists who work with organohalides argue that a higher burden of proof on safety for organochlorides as a class is inappropriate.

      In mutual service, Rich Murray
      sucralose, aspartame, sugar legal melee, How Sweet It Isn't, Avery Johnson, Wall Street Journal: Murray 2007.04.06
      sucralose (an earnest effort at a neutral summary of both sides of the Splenda toxicity debate), Wikipedia 2007.03.26: Murray 2007.03.29

      adroit PR firm Qorvis Communications, hired by Sugar Association, coyly sets up Citizens For Health front to attack sucralose (Splenda):
      Murray 2007.03.22
      Migraine from sucralose, Bigal ME & Krymchantowski AV,
      Headache 2006 March; formaldehyde from 11% methanol part of
      aspartame or from red wine causes same toxicity (hangover) harm:
      Murray 2006.04.24
      Comet assay tests groups of 4 mice to show sucralose genotoxicity
      in stomach, colon, lung, Yu F Sasaki et al, Mutation Research 2002,
      full plain text: Murray 2005.11.22
      reply to Ferne Hudson, Tate & Lyle PLC, re Splenda (sucralose) policy:
      Murray 2005.02.08

      "Of course, everyone chooses, as a natural priority,
      to actively find, quickly share, and positively act
      upon the facts about healthy and safe food, drink,
      and environment."

      Rich Murray, MA Room For All
      505-501-2298 1943 Otowi Road, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87505 new primary archive
      group with 111 members, 1,481 posts in a public,
      searchable archive
      bias, omissions, incuriosity = opportunity, aspartame safety evaluation, Magnuson BA, Burdock GA, Williams GM, 7 more, 2007 Sept, Ajinomoto funded 98 pages html [$ 32 781888262_content.pdf]: Murray 2007.09.15
      Send blank post to: <br /> to join<br />free,open, list with searchable archives for toxicity issues.<br />Richard \"Rich\" T. Murray Room For All 1943 Otowi Road Santa Fe, NM 87505<br /> 505-501-2298


      • #4