T Nation

Wheylow vs. Splenda...Any Thoughts?


Hi all,
I have a few recipes for bars that call for 1/2 cup of Splenda. I don't like what the net has to say about Splenda (ie negative health effects)

I Was researching a little bit and found a product called wheylow. You can read about it at www.wheylow.com. Is this a good substitute? Any thoughts are really appreciated.



Some people like stevia. It is an "all-natural" calorie free sweetener.


Our of curiosity, what does the internet (conclusively) have to say about splenda that's bad? I've only heard good things about it from a health standpoint, and the stuff's great in raw oats.


You're kidding right? It's linked to cancer. And it has been proven to act like sugar, causing further sugar cravings. It also causes you to hang on to fat if you are trying to lean out....


PLease provide linked articles with some research references. Rumors are meaningless


And Mercola and holisticmed.com don't really count.


Splenda (sucralose) is great.

Don't believe all the nutjobs who claim the sky is falling.


For such an unhealthy society, people worry an awful lot about foods/substances that are often eaten sparingly.

Maybe more emphasis should be placed on that quarter pounder and onion rings you just polished off. Don't you think?


As far as artificial sweetens go, Splenda is probably the best. It tastes the most like sugar and not nearly as many negatives as aspartame.

A half-cup of Splenda is quite a bit. Are you sure the recipe calls for pure Splenda and not the baking version. I think the baking version is a Splenda / sugar mix.

I personally prefer stevia mixed with sugar. I add a packet of each to my coffee and it tastes great.


No, since I don't eat that garbage.

I'm looking at a recipe from the Precision Nutrition book and I didn't see any specific suggestion as to the type of Splenda. I didn't realize there were different types. Maybe I'll take a closer look.


None of those things have been shown at all convincingly. As far as cancer goes, it's impossible to know. It hasn't been around long enough. The evidence that it acts like sugar and afffect insulin has been discredited. And I personally happen to know several diabetics who make use of splenda with zero effect on their insulin and zero impact on there craving sugar. And who said it causes you to hang on to fat?


I've read a little bit about Splenda (sucralose) a while ago. I think that while it can be linked to cancer (in lab mice), they have to consume an ungodly amount for it to do anything. In other words, I still use Splenda.


That seems to be the case for a lot of the cancer-linked testing done on rodents. At the dosages those rats/mice are given, damn near anything would cause cancer. You can't assault a body with an insane amount of anything without some type of negative reaction.

If I were to consume 40 gallons of milk, or 10 pounds of splenda, or whatever, a day, I bet I'd develop some type of cancer. I just don't find a lot of those tests all that relevant to the teaspoon of splenda being ingested by a 200lb. athlete....


I think that was saccharine.

In any event, I think if you don't eat it with a shovel, you'll be just fine.


Oh shit...


Lol at above.

I belive even sacchrine has been proven relatively safe. The FDA required a label to this effect until a study or a few studys were completed. They have since removed the warning.


I hope you've never used Grow! or Metabolic Drive then, because you'd be guarenteed to become a fat guy in chemotherapy.


BGB is a woman. A pretty good-looking one at that. But I still disagree with her about the 'dangers' of Splenda.


The question that we should be asking is: Is there anything that DOESN'T give lab rats cancer? You could feed a lab rat spring water and super-sloppy blowjobs and the little fucker would have a 12 pound tumor in a week.