ATLANTA (November 21, 2013) — A new review from Schiffman and Rother1 on biological issues related to sucralose is an opinion piece that reiterates past opinions expressed by Schiffman that have been previously refuted by experts in safety assessment. The publication represents no additional research and does not consider the vast evidence on sucralose which concludes that it is safe and can also be an effective tool in weight and diabetes management in humans.
Haley Curtis Stevens, Ph.D. Calorie Control Council President, noted, “The conclusions of this review do not reflect the majority of the literature on sucralose which show that it can aid in weight management along with proper diet and exercise. Further, this review is in conflict with the US FDA, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the Joint Expert Commission of Food Additives (JECFA) of the World Health Organization (WHO) and a host of other regulatory bodies who all agree sucralose is safe.”
The review is based largely on a 2008 study by Abou-Donia et al.2 — a study of which the conclusions were later found to be highly suspect. A panel of experts concluded that the 2008 study was “deficient in several critical areas and that its results cannot be interpreted as evidence that either Splenda, or sucralose, produced adverse effects in male rats, including effects on gastrointestinal microflora, body weight, CYP450 and P-gp activity, and nutrient and drug absorption. The study conclusions are not consistent with published literature and not supported by the data presented.”3