Splenda calories

Splenda calories DEFAULT

Everything You Need to Know About Sucralose

Download the Sucralose Fact Sheet for Consumers here

Download the Sucralose CPE Self-Study Activity here

Learn more about the Sucralose CPE Self-Study Activity here


Sucralose is a no-calorie sweetener that can be used to lower one’s intake of added sugars while still providing satisfaction from enjoying the taste of something sweet.While some types of sweeteners in this category are considered low-calorie (e.g., aspartame) and others are no-calorie (e.g., sucralose, monk fruit sweeteners and stevia sweeteners), collectively they are often referred to as sugar substitutes, high-intensity sweeteners, nonnutritive sweeteners or low-calorie sweeteners.

Like other no-calorie sweeteners, sucralose is intensely sweet. It is about 600 times sweeter than sugar, so only small amounts of sucraloseareused to match the sweetness provided by sugar. Sucralose is permitted by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use as a general-purpose sweetener, meaning it can be used as an ingredient in any type of food or beverage. Sucralose is exceptionallystable, so foods and beverages sweetened with sucralose stay sweet under a wide range of conditions. This includes frozen foods like ice cream and other frozen desserts, as well as foods that need to be heated to high temperatures, like baked goods and foods that require sterilization.However, a recipe that uses sucralose in place of sugar may turn out slightly different because, in addition to sweetness, sugar plays several roles related to volume and texture in recipes but varies based on the type of recipe.

Sucralose is also used intabletop sweeteners. There are numerous brands of sucralose-based tabletop sweeteners. The most common brandin the U.S. is Splenda® Original.


Sucralose is made from a process that begins with regular table sugar (sucrose); however, sucralose is not sugar. Three select hydroxyl groups on the sucrose molecule are replaced with three chlorine atoms. Sucralose’s structure prevents enzymes in the digestive tract from breaking it down, which is an inherent part of its safety. 


Most (about 85 percent) of consumed sucralose is not absorbedby the body and is excreted, unchanged, in the feces.¹,² Of the small amount that is absorbed (about 15 percent), none is broken down for energy—therefore, sucralose does not provide any calories. All absorbed sucralose is excreted quickly in the urine.¹,²


YES. More than 100 safety studies representing over 20 years of research have shown sucralose to be safe. In 1998, the FDA approved its use as a sweetener in 15 specific food categories.³ In 1999, the FDA expanded its regulation to allow sucralose as a “general-purpose sweetener,” meaning that it is approved for use in any type of food or beverage. Leading global health authorities such as theEuropean Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)have concluded that sucralose is safe for its intended use.⁴,⁵The safety of sucralose has also been confirmed byJapan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare;Food Standards Australia New Zealand; andHealth Canada. Based on the conclusions of these global authorities, sucralose is currently permitted for use in more than 100 countries.

The FDA has established an acceptable daily intake (ADI) for sucralose of 5 milligrams (mg) per kilogram (kg) of body weight per day. The JECFAfirst established an ADI of 0—15 mg/kg of body weight per day for sucralose in 1991.The European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Foodconfirmed JECFA’s ADI for sucralose in 2000.⁶The ADI represents an amount 100 times less than the quantity of sucralose found to achieve a no-observed-adverse-effect-level (NOAEL) in toxicology studies.The ADI is a conservative number that the vast majority of people will not reach. Using the ADI established by the FDA, a person weighing 150 pounds (68 kg)would exceed the ADI(340 mg of sucralose) if consuming more than 26 individual tabletop packets of sucraloseevery day over the course of their lifetime. While precise measurements of the total amount of sucralose people consume in the U.S. is limited, 1.6 mg/kg of body weight per day is a conservative mean estimate of sucralose intake from beveragesamong adultsthat hasrecently been reported.⁷This levelof intake is well below the FDA’s ADI. Globally, estimated sucralose intake from foods and beverages also remains well below the ADI established by JECFA. A 2018 scientific review found that studies conducted since 2008 raise no concerns for exceeding the ADI of the major low- and no-calorie sweeteners—including sucralose—in the general population.⁸


The acceptable daily intake, or ADI, is the average daily intake over a lifetime that is expected to be safe based on significant research.⁹It is derived by determining the no-observed-adverse-effect-level, or NOAEL, which is the highest intake level found to have no adverse effects in lifetime studies in animal models, divided by 100.¹⁰Setting the ADI 100 times lower than the upper level found to have no adverse effects in toxicologystudies adds a margin ofsafetythat helps to ensure that human intakes will be safe. 


YES. Health and food safety authorities such as the FDA and JECFA have concluded that sucralose is safe for adults and children to consume within the ADI.Sucralose metabolism is not expected to be different in children than it is in adults.²,³

Sucralose can add sweetness to a child’s foods and beverages without contributing to calories consumedor added sugars intake. Sucralose is not cariogenic or fermentable like sugars, so it does not increase the risk of dental caries.¹¹With a focus on reducing consumption of added sugars in recent decades, the number of food and beverage products containing low-calorie sweeteners has increased. While observational research among U.S. children and adults has shown an increase in the percentage of people reportingdaily consumption of products containing low-calorie sweeteners,¹² current intake of low-calorie sweeteners is considered to be well within acceptable levels, bothglobally and in the U.S.⁷,⁸

The American Heart Association (AHA) advises against children regularly consuming beverages containing low-calorie sweeteners, instead recommending water and other unsweetened beverages such as plain milk.¹³One of the notable exceptions in the 2018 AHA science advisory is made for children with diabetes, whose blood glucose management may be benefitted by consuming low-calorie-sweetened beverages in place of sugar-sweetened varieties. Citing an absence of data, the 2019 policy statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not provide advice on children under two years of age consuming foods or beverages that contain low-calorie sweeteners.¹⁴The 2019 AAP policy statement does, however, acknowledge potential benefits of low-calorie sweeteners for children by reducing calorie intake (especially among children with obesity), incidence of dental caries and glycemic response among children with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The 2020—2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) do not recommend the consumption of low-calorie sweeteners or added sugars by children younger than two years of age.¹⁵ This DGA recommendation is not related to body weight, diabetes or the safety of added sugars or low-calorie sweeteners, but is instead intended to avoid infants and toddlersdeveloping a preference for overly sweet foods during this formative phase.


YES. The consumption of low-calorie sweeteners within their respective ADIs is safe for women who are pregnant or breastfeeding according to the EFSA, FDA and JECFA. Research has shown that sucralose has no adverse effects on expecting or nursing mothers or on the fetus, and there are no known side effects of sucralose consumption.²,¹⁶ Because only small amounts of sucralose are absorbed into the bloodstream, the amount of sucralose present in breast milk is very low.¹⁷All women who are pregnant or nursing need the necessary nutrients and calories for their baby’s optimal growth and development, while taking care not to exceed their needs. 


YES. Foods and beverages made with sucralose are frequently recommended to people with diabetes as an alternative to sugar-sweetened foods and beverages and as a way to help these individuals satisfy their desire for sweet taste while managing carbohydrate intake. Extensive research shows that sucralose does not raise blood glucose levels or otherwise affect blood glucose management.¹⁸⁻²¹Recent consensus statements by experts in nutrition, medicine, physical activity and public health cite the neutral effects of low-calorie sweeteners on hemoglobin A1C, insulin and fasting and post-prandial glucose,andconclude that the use of low-calorie sweeteners in diabetes self-care may contribute to better glycemic management.²²⁻²⁴

Global health professional organizations have published their own conclusions on the safety and role of low-calorie sweeteners for people with diabetes. The 2021 American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetesstate that, “For some people with diabetes who are accustomed to regularly consuming sugar-sweetened products, nonnutritive sweeteners (containing few or no calories) may be an acceptable substitute for nutritive sweeteners (those containing calories, such as sugar, honey, and agave syrup) when consumed in moderation. Use of nonnutritive sweeteners does not appear to have a significant effect on glycemic management, but they can reduce overall calorie and carbohydrate intake, as long as individuals are not compensating with additional calories from other food sources.”²⁵Similar statements addressing the safety and potential use of low- and no-calorie sweeteners such as sucralose for people with diabetes are supported by Diabetes Canada andDiabetes UK.²⁶,²⁷

Despite these conclusions, some studies raise questions about sucralose and blood glucose management. For example, a 2013 randomized crossover trial of 17 insulin–sensitive individuals with obesity who did not regularly consume low-calorie sweeteners proposed that sucralose may “prime the pump” to increase blood glucose and insulin concentrations if glucoseis consumed soon after sucralose.²⁸  Results of other randomized and controlled clinical trials do not support this hypothesis.29-31Larger and longer clinical trials do not indicatethat sucralose adverselyaffectsblood glucose management,¹⁹⁻²¹,³² which illustrates the importance of examining the totality of evidence when considering the potential for sucralose (or other low-calorie sweeteners) to impact blood glucose control.

Some observational studies have demonstrated an association between low-calorie sweetener consumption and the risk for type 2 diabetes;³³,³⁴ however, observational studies do not prove cause and effect. Conclusions from observational study designsare at risk of confounding and reverse causality. For instance, many studies do not adjust for obesity status, a direct contributor to developing prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. Given that individuals with overweight and obesity tend to consume more low-calorie–sweetened beverages as compared with lean individuals,³⁵this is a critical omission.


Substituting foods and beverages sweetened with low- and no-calorie sweeteners like sucralose for their full-sugar counterparts can play a role in weight loss and/or weight management, as demonstrated in numerous clinical trials.³⁶⁻³⁹The National Weight Control Registry(NWCR) is the largest longitudinal study of successful weight loss maintainers who have lost at least 30 pounds and kept if off for more than one year. In an online surveyof434 NWCR members, over 50 percent reported that they regularly consumed low-calorie beverages;78percent ofthese membersreported that doing so helped control their calorie intake.⁴⁰

Conclusions from observational research studying the impact of low-calorie sweeteners on body weight often conflict with data from randomized controlled trials.Some observational studies have reported an association between use of low-calorie sweeteners and increased body weight and waist circumference in adults.⁴¹ A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies published in 2017 found that consumption of low-calorie sweeteners was also associated with increases in body mass index (BMI) and higher incidence of obesity and cardiometabolic disease in adults.⁴² In children and adolescents, observational studies have shown an association between consumption of low-calorie–sweetened beverages and increased body weight, while evidence from randomized controlled trials have not.⁴³,⁴⁴Other recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have concluded that findings from observational studies showed no association between low-calorie sweetener intake and body weight and a small positive association with higher BMI.³⁶,³⁷,⁴⁵

While observational studies can be important for generating hypotheses, it is important to note thattheyhave limitations. By their nature, observational studies cannot prove cause and effect. Instead, observational studies examine the association between an exposure (such as reported sucralose intake) and an outcome (such as body weight or a health condition). Associations found in observational studiescan be confounded by various factors and/ormay be the result of reverse causality. A common example of this is a person changing their food and beverage choices after being diagnosed with a health condition: The disease led to them making these changes; the changes they made did not lead to the disease. 

Additionally, observational studies are not randomized, so they cannot control for all of the other exposures or factors that may be causing or influencing results. For example, one hypothesis is that people may compensate for “calorie-free” choices by eating or drinking more calories in other food choices or future meals.⁴⁶,⁴⁷ Think of a person who may justify ordering dessert at a restaurant because they had a diet soda with their meal: The extra calories from the dessert will likely be greater than the calories saved by ordering the diet beverage. These additional calories may contribute to weight gain or prevent further weight loss. This behavior is called the “licensing effect” or “self-licensing,” in which an individual justifies giving into indulgences by finding reasons to make a behavior that is inconsistent with their goals more acceptable.⁴⁸ Although it may occur in some instances, there is little evidence from scientific studies that people consistently and consciously overconsume calories as a result of consuming low-calorie sweeteners or foods and beverages that contain them.⁴⁹

It has also been suggested that people who already have overweight or obesity may begin to choose low-calorie–sweetened foods and beverages as one method for losing weight.⁵⁰⁻⁵³ This makes it difficult to assume that the use of a low-calorie sweetener can be the cause of weight gain, since reverse causality may be a factor. A 2019 systematic review and meta-analysis funded by the World Health Organization recommended cautiously interpreting results from observational studies on low-calorie sweeteners and health outcomes while concentrating on plausible confounding and reverse causality.⁴⁵

Data from randomized controlled trials, considered to be the gold standard for assessing causal effects, support that substituting low-calorie sweetener options for regular-calorie versions leads to modest weight loss.³⁶⁻³⁹, ⁴⁵, ⁵⁵, ⁵⁶In a 2016 randomized clinical trial, over 300 participants were assigned to consume either water or low-calorie–sweetened beverages for one year as part of a program that included 12 weeks of weight loss followed by 40 weeks of weight maintenance interventions. Those who were assigned to the low-calorie–sweetened beverage group lost 6.21 kg on average, whilethose in the water group lost 2.45 kg.⁵⁶

While a few systematic reviews have concluded that low-calorie sweetener consumption does not lead to appreciable weight loss or weight gain, such findings appear to be the result of how the studies are compared.⁴² As stated by Mela, et al.,⁵³ some study designs allow for the analysis of outcomes between caloric and non-caloric alternatives,³⁷,³⁹ while others do not.⁴²

The Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) included a systematic review of 37 studies (six of which were randomized controlled trials) published between January 2000 and June 2019 on the role of low- and no-calorie–sweetened beverages on adiposity. The DGAC report concluded that low- and no-calorie sweeteners should be considered an option for managing body weight.⁵⁷

It is important to note that losing and maintaining body weight requires multiple simultaneous approaches. Making a single change, such as substituting low-calorie sweeteners for full-calorie, sugar-containing products, is just one component. Lifestyle and behavioral practices like eating healthfully, exercising regularly, getting enough sleep, and maintaining social support networks are all important factors in achieving weight loss and weight–maintenance goals.


Highly palatable foods activate brain regions of reward and pleasure. This positive association can enhance appetite, and, if left unchecked, the resulting increase in food intake can lead to overweight and obesity.⁵⁸Low-calorie sweeteners can also lead to a stimulation of reward pathways by activating sweet taste receptors, but they are not a source of calories.

Some have expressed concern that activating reward pathways without delivering calories to the body may have unintended consequences.Some animal studies have demonstrated changes in food intake and appetite-related hormones after consuming low-calorie sweeteners.⁴¹,⁵⁴However, other animal studies show that pathways involved in sugar digestion and preference forsugar are not activated by low-calorie sweeteners.⁵⁹,⁶⁰

Low- and no-calorie sweeteners, including sucralose, have not been found to enhance appetite or cravings in humans.²⁴,⁶¹ Some randomized controlled trials⁶² have demonstrated the opposite effect–including a decrease in hunger⁴⁷ and reduced dessert intake compared with those who drank water.⁶³Others have shown no effect of sucralose on hormones that regulate hunger and fullness⁶⁴,⁶⁵ or on total energy intake and selection of sweet foods.⁶⁶,⁶⁷


Although research on the gut microbiome is still in its infancy, the microbes living in theintestinal tract have become recognized as potentially significant contributors to health. In rodents that have consumed sucralose, changes in the gut microbiota species profile have been reported.⁶⁸,⁶⁹However, the clinical meaningfulness of such changes in rodents is not known, and the applicability of animal microbiome studies to humans may be limited.⁷⁰

Currently, no standards exist to define a healthy human microbiome.⁷¹There are significant differences among the microbiome profiles of different people,and research has shown that the gut microbiome can quickly respond to normal changes in the diet.⁷²International experts have noted that huge variabilities in microbiome profiles makes it difficult to distinguish normal variation from adverse effects. 

Sucralose is not metabolized by gut microbiota, and no adverse health effects on the gastrointestinal system are known from either human or well-controlled toxicology studies.² Human studies with repeated sucralose consumption show no meaningful effect on the gut microbiome.⁷⁰,⁷³Consistent with this, a 2019 literature review found no conclusive evidence that low-calorie sweeteners negatively impact gut microbiota.⁷⁴ In 2020, a panel of experts on low-calorie sweeteners came to a similar conclusion that, at this time, data on the effects of low-calorie sweeteners on the human gut microbiota are limited and do not provide adequate evidence that they impact gut health at doses that are relevant to human consumption.²⁴


All types of foods and beverages, including those made with sucralose, can have a place in a variety of healthyeating patterns. Sucralose has been FDA-approved as a food additive for two decades, and its safety has been acknowledged by many international health authorities. The impact of low-calorie sweeteners on, and association with, chronic conditions like obesity and type 2 diabetes have been extensively studied. Observational studies linking low-calorie sweeteners to weight gain inherently cannot demonstrate a causal relationship and suffer from methodological issues like confounding and reverse causality. In contrast, randomized controlled trials consistently support that low-calorie sweeteners can be useful in nutritional strategies to assist with weight-loss and/or weight-maintenance goals.Sucralose has no impact on blood glucose or insulin levels in randomized controlled trials, and no effect on appetite. While the role of the gut microbiome in health is still being explored, the available research does not suggest that low- and no-calorie sweeteners such as sucralose adversely affect the gut microbiome.

Adopting a healthful, active lifestyle that is tailored to personal goals and priorities is vital to supporting one’s well–being. Choosing foods and beverages sweetened with low- and no-calorie sweeteners such as sucralose is one way to reduce consumption of added sugars and keep calories in check—important components in maintaining health and reducing risk for lifestyle-related disease.


  1. Roberts A, Renwick AG, Sims J, Snodin DJ. Sucralose metabolism and pharmacokinetics in man. Food Chem Toxicol. 2000;38 Suppl 2:S31-41.
  2. Magnuson BA, Roberts A, Nestmann ER. Critical review of the current literature on the safety of sucralose. Food Chem Toxicol. 2017 Aug;106(Pt A):324-355.
  3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Food additives permitted for human consumption. 21 C.F.R. §172.831 (1998).
  4. EFSA ANS Panel (EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food). Safety of the proposed extension of use of sucralose (E 955) in foods for special medical purposes in young children. EFSA Journal. 2016 Jan;14(1):4361.
  5. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives‎. Evaluation of certain food additives and contaminants: thirty-seventh report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. Geneva, Switzerland. 1991.
  6. European Commission Scientific Committee on Food. Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on sucralose. Brussels, Belgium. 2000.
  7. Tran NL, Barraj LM, Hearty AP, Jack MM. Tiered intake assessment for low- and no-calorie sweeteners in beverages. Food AdditContam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess. 2021 Feb;38(2):208-222.
  8. Martyn D, Darch M, Roberts A, Lee HY, Yaqiong Tian T, Kaburagi N, Belmar P. Low-/No-Calorie Sweeteners: A Review of Global Intakes. Nutrients. 2018 Mar 15;10(3):357.
  9. World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Principles and Methods for the Risk Assessment of Chemicals in Food. Chapter 5. 2009.
  10. Renwick AG. Safety factors and establishment of acceptable daily intakes. Food AdditContam. 1991 Mar-Apr;8(2):135-49.
  11. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Health claims: dietary noncariogenic carbohydrate sweeteners and dental caries.21 C.F.R. §101.80 (2006).
  12. Sylvetsky AC, Jin Y, Clark EJ, Welsh JA, Rother KI, Talegawkar SA. Consumption of Low-Calorie Sweeteners among Children and Adults in the United States. AcadNutr Diet. 2017 Mar;117(3):441-448.e2.
  13. Johnson RK, Lichtenstein AH, Anderson CAM, Carson JA, Després JP, Hu FB, Kris-Etherton PM, Otten JJ, Towfighi A, Wylie-Rosett J; American Heart Association Nutrition Committee of the Council on Lifestyle and Cardiometabolic Health; Council on Cardiovascular and Stroke Nursing; Council on Clinical Cardiology; Council on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research; and Stroke Council. Low-Calorie Sweetened Beverages and Cardiometabolic Health: A Science Advisory From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2018 Aug 28;138(9):e126-e140. 
  14. Baker-Smith CM, de Ferranti SD, Cochran WJ; COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION, SECTION ON GASTROENTEROLOGY, HEPATOLOGY, AND NUTRITION. The Use of Nonnutritive Sweeteners in Children. Pediatrics. 2019 Nov;144(5):e20192765. 
  15. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025. 9th Edition. December 2020. Available at DietaryGuidelines.gov.
  16. Grotz VL, Munro IC. An overview of the safety of sucralose. RegulToxicolPharmacol. 2009 Oct;55(1):1-5. 
  17. Sylvetsky AC, Gardner AL, Bauman V, Blau JE, Garraffo HM, Walter PJ, Rother KI. Nonnutritive Sweeteners in Breast Milk. Toxicol Environ Health A. 2015;78(16):1029-32. 
  18. Romo-Romo A, Aguilar-Salinas CA, Brito-Cordova GX, Gomez Diaz RA, Vilchis Valentin D, Almeda-Valdes P. Effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on glucose metabolism and appetite regulating hormones: systematic review of observational prospective studies and clinical trials. PLoS One. 2016 Aug 18;11(8):e0161264.
  19. Nichol AD, Holle MJ, An R. Glycemic impact of non-nutritive sweeteners: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2018 Jun;72(6):796-804.
  20. Grotz VL, Pi-Sunyer X, Porte D Jr, Roberts A, Richard Trout J. A 12-week randomized clinical trial investigating the potential for sucralose to affect glucose homeostasis. RegulToxicolPharmacol. 2017 Aug;88:22-33.
  21. Greyling A, Appleton KM, Raben A, Mela DJ. Acute glycemic and insulinemic effects of low-energy sweeteners: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2020 Oct 1;112(4):1002-1014.
  22. Serra-Majem L, et al. Ibero⁻American Consensus on Low- and No-Calorie Sweeteners: Safety, Nutritional Aspects and Benefits in Food and Beverages. Nutrients. 2018 Jun 25;10(7):818.
  23. Evert AB, Dennison M, Gardner CD, Garvey WT, Lau KHK, MacLeod J, Mitri J, Pereira RF, Rawlings K, Robinson S, Saslow L, Uelmen S, Urbanski PB, Yancy WS Jr. Nutrition Therapy for Adults With Diabetes or Prediabetes: A Consensus Report. Diabetes Care. 2019 May;42(5):731-754. 
  24. Ashwell M, Gibson S, Bellisle F, Buttriss J, Drewnowski A, Fantino M, Gallagher AM, de Graaf K, Goscinny S, Hardman CA, Laviada-Molina H, López-García R, Magnuson B, Mellor D, Rogers PJ, Rowland I, Russell W, Sievenpiper JL, la Vecchia C. Expert consensus on low-calorie sweeteners: facts, research gaps and suggested actions. Nutr Res Rev. 2020 Jun;33(1):145-154. 
  25. American Diabetes Association. 5. Facilitating Behavior Change and Well-being to Improve Health Outcomes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020. Diabetes Care. 2020 Jan;43(Suppl 1):S48-S65. 
  26. Diabetes Canada Clinical Practice Guidelines Expert Committee, Sievenpiper JL, Chan CB, Dworatzek PD, Freeze C, Williams SL. Nutrition Therapy. Can J Diabetes. 2018 Apr;42 Suppl 1:S64-S79.
  27. Dyson PA, Twenefour D, Breen C, Duncan A, Elvin E, Goff L, Hill A, Kalsi P, Marsland N, McArdle P, Mellor D, Oliver L, Watson K. Diabetes UK evidence-based nutrition guidelines for the prevention and management of diabetes. Diabet Med. 2018 May;35(5):541-547.
  28. Pepino MY, Tiemann CD, Patterson BW, Wice BM, Klein S. Sucralose affects glycemic and hormonal responses to an oral glucose load. Diabetes Care. 2013 Sep;36(9):2530-5.
  29. Brown AW, Bohan Brown MM, Onken KL, Beitz DC. Short-term consumption of sucralose, a nonnutritive sweetener, is similar to water with regard to select markers of hunger signaling and short-term glucose homeostasis in women. Nutr Res. 2011 Dec;31(12):882-8.
  30. Stellingwerff T, Godin JP, Beaumont M, Tavenard A, Grathwohl D, van Bladeren PJ, Kapp AF, le Coutre J, Damak S. Effects of pre-exercise sucralose ingestion on carbohydrate oxidation during exercise. Int J Sport NutrExercMetab. 2013 Dec;23(6):584-92.
  31. Temizkan S, Deyneli O, Yasar M, Arpa M, Gunes M, Yazici D, Sirikci O, Haklar G, Imeryuz N, Yavuz DG. Sucralose enhances GLP-1 release and lowers blood glucose in the presence of carbohydrate in healthy subjects but not in patients with type 2 diabetes. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2015 Feb;69(2):162-6.
  32. Romo-Romo A, Aguilar-Salinas CA, López-Carrasco MG, Guillén-Pineda LE, Brito-Córdova GX, Gómez-Díaz RA, Gómez-Pérez FJ, Almeda-Valdes P. Sucralose Consumption over 2 Weeks in Healthy Subjects Does Not Modify Fasting Plasma Concentrations of Appetite-Regulating Hormones: A Randomized Clinical Trial. AcadNutr Diet. 2020 Aug;120(8):1295-1304.
  33. Sakurai M, Nakamura K, Miura K, Takamura T, Yoshita K, Nagasawa SY, Morikawa Y, Ishizaki M, Kido T, Naruse Y, Suwazono Y, Sasaki S, Nakagawa H. Sugar-sweetened beverage and diet soda consumption and the 7-year risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus in middle-aged Japanese men. Eur J Nutr. 2014 Feb;53(1):251-8. 
  34. Imamura F, O’Connor L, Ye Z, Mursu J, Hayashino Y, Bhupathiraju SN, Forouhi NG. Consumption of sugar sweetened beverages, artificially sweetened beverages, and fruit juice and incidence of type 2 diabetes: systematic review, meta-analysis, and estimation of population attributable fraction. BMJ. 2015 Jul 21;351:h3576. 
  35. Bleich SN, Wolfson JA, Vine S, Wang YC. Diet-beverage consumption and caloric intake among US adults, overall and by body weight. Am J Public Health. 2014 Mar;104(3):e72-8.
  36. Miller PE, Perez V. Low-calorie sweeteners and body weight and composition: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Sep;100(3):765-77.
  37. Rogers PJ. Hogenkamp PS, de Graaf C, Higgs S, Lluch A, Ness AR, Penfold C, Perry R, Putz P, Yeomans MR, Mela DJ. Does low-energy sweetener consumption affect energy intake and body weight? A systematic review, including meta-analyses, of the evidence from human and animal studies. Int J Obes(Lond). 2016 Mar;40(3):381-94.
  38. Laviada-Molina H, Molina-Segui F, Pérez-Gaxiola G, Cuello-García C, Arjona-Villicaña R, Espinosa-Marrón A, Martinez-Portilla RJ. Effects of nonnutritive sweeteners on body weight and BMI in diverse clinical contexts: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Rev. 2020 Jul;21(7):e13020.
  39. Rogers PJ, Appleton KM. The effects of low-calorie sweeteners on energy intake and body weight: a systematic review and meta-analyses of sustained intervention studies. Int J Obes (Lond). 2021 Mar;45(3):464-478.
  40. Catenacci VA, Pan Z, Thomas JG, Ogden LG, Roberts SA, Wyatt HR, Wing RR, Hill JO. Low/no calorie sweetened beverage consumption in the National Weight Control Registry. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2014 Oct;22(10):2244-51.
  41. Fowler SPG. Low-calorie sweetener use and energy balance: Results from experimental studies in animals, and large-scale prospective studies in humans. PhysiolBehav. 2016 Oct 1;164(Pt B):517-523.
  42. Azad MB, Abou-Setta AM, Chauhan BF, Rabbani R, Lys J, Copstein L, Mann A, Jeyaraman MM, Reid AE, Fiander M, MacKay DS, McGavock J, Wicklow B, Zarychanski R. Nonnutritive sweeteners and cardiometabolic health: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies. CMAJ. 2017 Jul 17;189(28):E929-E939.
  43. de Ruyter JC, Olthof MR, Seidell JC, Katan MB. A trial of sugar-free or sugar-sweetened beverages and body weight in children. Engl J Med. 2012 Oct 11;367(15):1397-406.
  44. Young J, Conway EM, Rother KI, Sylvetsky AC. Low-calorie sweetener use, weight, and metabolic health among children: A mini-review. PediatrObes. 2019 Aug;14(8):e12521. 
  45. Toews I, Lohner S, Küllenberg de Gaudry D, Sommer H, Meerpohl JJ. Association between intake of non-sugar sweeteners and health outcomes: systematic review and meta-analyses of randomised and non-randomised controlled trials and observational studies. BMJ. 2019 Jan 2;364:k4718. 
  46. Mattes RD, Popkin BM. Nonnutritive sweetener consumption in humans: effects on appetite and food intake and their putative mechanisms. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jan;89(1):1-14.
  47. Peters JC, Beck J. Low Calorie Sweetener (LCS) use and energy balance. PhysiolBehav. 2016 Oct 1;164(Pt B):524-528.
  48. De Witt Huberts JC, Evers C, De Ridder DT. “Because I am worth it”: a theoretical framework and empirical review of a justification-based account of self-regulation failure. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2014 May;18(2):119-38. 
  49. Rogers PJ. The role of low-calorie sweeteners in the prevention and management of overweight and obesity: evidence v. conjecture. Proc Nutr Soc. 2018 Aug;77(3):230-238.
  50. Drewnowski A, Rehm CD. The use of low-calorie sweeteners is associated with self-reported prior intent to lose weight in a representative sample of US adults. Nutr Diabetes. 2016 Mar 7;6:e202.
  51. Sievenpiper JL, Khan TA, Ha V, Viguiliouk E, Auyeung R. The importance of study design in the assessment of nonnutritive sweeteners and cardiometabolic health. CMAJ. 2017 Nov 20;189(46):E1424-E1425. 
  52. Malik VS. Non-sugar sweeteners and health. BMJ. 2019 Jan 3;364:k5005. 
  53. Mela DJ, McLaughlin J, Rogers PJ. Perspective: Standards for Research and Reporting on Low-Energy (“Artificial”) Sweeteners. Adv Nutr. 2020 May 1;11(3):484-491. 
  54. Sylvetsky AC, Rother KI. Nonnutritive sweeteners in weight management and chronic disease: a review. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2018 Apr;26(4):635-640.
  55. Ebbeling CB, Feldman HA, Steltz SK, Quinn NL, Robinson LM, Ludwig DS. Effects of Sugar-Sweetened, Artificially Sweetened, and Unsweetened Beverages on Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, Body Composition, and Sweet Taste Preference: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 Aug 4;9(15):e015668. 
  56. Peters JC, Beck J, Cardel M, Wyatt HR, Foster GD, Pan Z, Wojtanowski AC, Vander Veur SS, Herring SJ, Brill C, Hill JO. The effects of water and non-nutritive sweetened beverages on weight loss and weight maintenance: A randomized clinical trial. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2016 Feb;24(2):297–304.
  57. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.Scientific Report of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee: Advisory Report to the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Washington, DC. 2020.
  58. Singh M. Mood, food, and obesity. Front Psychol. 2014 Sep 1;5:925.
  59. de Araujo IE. Circuit organization of sugar reinforcement. PhysiolBehav. 2016 Oct 1;164(Pt B):473-477. 
  60. Tan HE, Sisti AC, Jin H, Vignovich M, Villavicencio M, Tsang KS, Goffer Y, Zuker CS. The gut-brain axis mediates sugar preference. Nature. 2020 Apr;580(7804):511-516.
  61. Rogers PJ. The role of low-calorie sweeteners in the prevention and management of overweight and obesity: evidence v. conjecture. Proc Nutr Soc. 2017 Nov 23:1-9.
  62. Higgins KA, Mattes RD. A randomized controlled trial contrasting the effects of 4 low-calorie sweeteners and sucrose on body weight in adults with overweight or obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019 May 1;109(5):1288-1301.
  63. Piernas C, Tate DF, Wang X, Popkin BM. Does diet-beverage intake affect dietary consumption patterns? Results from the Choose Healthy Options Consciously Everyday (CHOICE) randomized clinical trial. Am J Clin Nutr. 2013 Mar;97(3):604-11.
  64. Ford HE, Peters V, Martin NM, Sleeth ML, Ghatei MA, Frost GS, Bloom SR. Effects of oral ingestion of sucralose on gut hormone response and appetite in healthy normal-weight subjects. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2011 Apr;65(4):508-13.
  65. Steinert RE, Frey F, Töpfer A, Drewe J, Beglinger C. Effects of carbohydrate sugars and artificial sweeteners on appetite and the secretion of gastrointestinal satiety peptides. Br J Nutr. 2011 May;105(9):1320-8. 
  66. Bellisle F. Intense Sweeteners, Appetite for the Sweet Taste, and Relationship to Weight Management. CurrObes Rep. 2015 Mar;4(1):106-10. 
  67. Fantino M, Fantino A, Matray M, Mistretta F. Beverages containing low energy sweeteners do not differ from water in their effects on appetite, energy intake and food choices in healthy, non-obese French adults. Appetite. 2018 Jun 1;125:557-565.
  68. Bian X, Chi L, Gao B, Tu P, Ru H, Lu K. Gut Microbiome Response to Sucralose and Its Potential Role in Inducing Liver Inflammation in Mice. Front Physiol. 2017 Jul 24;8:487.
  69. Uebanso T, Ohnishi A, Kitayama R, Yoshimoto A, Nakahashi M, Shimohata T, Mawatari K, Takahashi A. Effects of Low-Dose Non-Caloric Sweetener Consumption on Gut Microbiota in Mice. Nutrients. 2017 Jun 1;9(6):560.
  70. Ahmad SY, Friel J, Mackay D. The Effects of Non-Nutritive Artificial Sweeteners, Aspartame and Sucralose, on the Gut Microbiome in Healthy Adults: Secondary Outcomes of a Randomized Double-Blinded Crossover Clinical Trial. Nutrients. 2020 Nov 6;12(11):3408. 
  71. Merten C, Schoonjans R, Di Gioia D, Peláez C, Sanz Y, Maurici D, Robinson T. Editorial: Exploring the need to include microbiomes into EFSA’s scientific assessments. EFSA J. 2020 Jun 29;18(6):e18061.
  72. David LA, Maurice CF, Carmody RN, Gootenburg DB, Button JE, Wolfe BE, Ling AV, Devlin AS, Varma Y, Fischbach MA, Biddinger SB, Dutton RJ, Turnbaugh PJ. Diet rapidly and reproducibly alters the human gut microbiome. Nature. 2014 Jan 23;505(7484):559-63.
  73. Thomson P, Santibañez R, Aguirre C, Galgani JE, Garrido D. Short-term impact of sucralose consumption on the metabolic response and gut microbiome of healthy adults. Br J Nutr. 2019 Oct 28;122(8):856-862.
  74. Lobach AR, Roberts A, Rowland IR. Assessing the in vivo data on low/no-calorie sweeteners and the gut microbiota. Food Chem Toxicol. 2019 Feb;124:385-399. 
Sours: https://foodinsight.org/everything-you-need-to-know-about-sucralose/

No Calorie Sweetener Packets

Informasi Gizi

Ukuran Porsi

1 packet (1 g)


0 kj

0 kkal



Lemak Jenuh














Edit Makanan ini

Tambahan Deskripsi/Catatan:
Your body processes each serving of Splenda with 1 net carb.
There are actually 4 calories in each packet, but they are allowed to put zero because it is less than 5 calories.
RE: My edit (angiekae68)

The USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference shows that 10 grams, i.e., ten individual packets, of Splenda (NDB No: 19868) have 33 Calories. Ten grams of Splenda contain 9.00 g of carbohydrates consisting of 8.03 g of sugars (dextrose) and 0.96 grams of starch (maltodextrin).

From Michael Rae of the Calorie Restriction Society:

"Artificial sweeteners such as Splenda are mixtures of dextrose, maltodextrin, and sucralose. The carbohydrates in ten grams of Splenda have 33 Calories compared to 39 Calories for an equal weight of sugar. The manufacturers reduce the serving size so that the calories can be rounded to zero. You can check this using CRON-o-meter by typing "splenda" (USDA 19868) and specifying 10 grams.

These numbers here aren't quite right on a couple of fronts. First off, as regards soft drinks, the manufacturers don't use Splenda mix, which is bulked up as you describe for consumer use, but pure sucralose, which contains exceedingly close to zero metabolizable energy, so it doesn't apply to them (or to other premanufactured foods).

As to Splenda proper: the error here is that you're assuming that one substitutes the stuff for sugar on a gram-for-gram basis, which for the packets you don't: as the USDA entry notes, a packet is only 1 g, but it replaces 1 tsp (4.2 g) of table sugar. So you're replacing 16.3 Calories with 3.3 Calories -- a substantial savings. Cf the manufacturer's information: www.splendaprofessional . com

... pp. 13-14, where they round UP a bit, indicating that a packet has 1g carb and 4 Calories. (SPLENDA® Sugar Blend and Granulated are
higher-Calorie as they contain a lot more sugar, for the bulking
properties required to substitute in baking and other projects, but
still contain a lot fewer Calories than pure sucrose).


Apakah informasi ini tidak akurat atau tidak lengkap? Klik disini untuk mengedit.


dari AKG*

(0 kal)

0% AKG

Rincian Kalori:


Karbohidrat (100%)


Lemak (0%)


Protein (0%)


Ringkasan Gizi:









Terdapat 0 kalori dalam 1 packet (1 g).
Rincian Kalori: 0% lemak, 0% karb, 0% prot.
Sours: https://www.fatsecret.co.id/Diary.aspx?pa=fjrd&rid=1717231
  1. 1976 corvette weight
  2. Marvel characters iq
  3. Small fairytale cottage house plans
  4. Apocalipsis 22 10
  5. Neca aliens 2021

Splenda® Original Sweeteners   >   Splenda® Sweetener Packets

Splenda® Sweetener Packets

Our Splenda Sweetener tastes like sugar with zero calories. It is the perfect zero calorie sugar alternative for sweetening your coffee, tea, other beverages, oatmeal, fruit, and more! The Splenda brand is the number one recommended sweetener brand by doctors and dietitians, plus it’s America’s favorite sweetener brand. Try Splenda sweeteners today and taste the difference! Proudly made in the USA.

Available in 50, 100, 200, 400, 700, 1000, and 1200 ct.

Fast Facts:
  • Zero calorie sweetener
  • Tastes like sugar
  • Convenient for on-the-go sweetness
  • Proudly made in the USA
  • #1 recommended brand by doctors and dietitians

Dextrose, Maltodextrin, Splenda Sucralose

Sweetness to Sugar:

Each packet provides the sweetness of two teaspoons of sugar

Convert Sugar to Splenda:

Convert Sugar to Splenda in Your Recipes

Want to turn your favorite dessert recipe into a less added sugar version? Simply select the type of Splenda Product you want to use from the menu below, then the amount of sugar in your recipe. We'll tell you how much Splenda Sweetener to use in place of sugar!

Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Sweetener Packets
2 tsp1 packet
1 Tbsp1 1/2 packets
1/8 cup3 packets
1/4 cup6 packets
1/3 cup8 packets
1/2 cup12 packets
2/3 cup16 packets
3/4 cup18 packets
1 cup24 packets
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Granulated Sweetener
1 tsp1 tsp
1 Tbsp1 Tbsp
1/4 cup1/4 cup
1/3 cup1/3 cup
1/2 cup1/2 cup
2/3 cup2/3 cup
3/4 cup3/4 cup
1 cup1 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Sugar Blend
1/4 cup2 Tbsp
1/3 cup2 Tbsp + 2 tsp
1/2 cup1/4 cup
2/3 cup1/3 cup
3/4 cup6 Tbsp
1 cup1/2 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Brown Sugar Blend
1/4 cup2 Tbsp
1/3 cup2 Tbsp + 2 tsp
1/2 cup1/4 cup
2/3 cup1/3 cup
3/4 cup6 Tbsp
1 cup1/2 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Minis
2 tsp2 tablets
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Stevia Sweetener Packets
2 tsp sugar1 packet
1 Tbsp sugar1 1/2 packets
1/8 cup sugar3 packets
1/4 cup sugar6 packets
1/3 cup sugar8 packets
1/2 cup sugar12 packets
2/3 cup sugar16 packets
3/4 cup sugar18 packets
1 cup sugar24 packets
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Stevia Sweetener Jar
1 tsp1/2 tsp
1 Tbsp1/2 Tbsp
1/4 cup2 Tbsp
1/3 cup2 Tbsp + 2 tsp
1/2 cup1/4 cup
2/3 cup1/3 cup
3/4 cup6 Tbsp
1 cup1/2 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Stevia Granulated Sweetener
1 tsp1 tsp
1 Tbsp1 Tbsp
1/4 cup1/4 cup
1/3 cup1/3 cup
1/2 cup1/2 cup
2/3 cup2/3 cup
3/4 cup3/4 cup
1 cup1 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Monk Fruit Granulated Sweetener
1 tsp1 tsp
1 Tbsp1 Tbsp
1/4 cup1/4 cup
1/3 cup1/3 cup
1/2 cup1/2 cup
2/3 cup2/3 cup
3/4 cup3/4 cup
1 cup1 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Allulose Granulated Sweetener
1 tsp1 tsp
1 Tbsp1 Tbsp
1/4 cup1/4 cup
1/3 cup1/3 cup
1/2 cup1/2 cup
2/3 cup2/3 cup
3/4 cup3/4 cup
1 cup1 cup
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Liquid Sweetener
1 tsp1/2 squeeze (1/16 tsp)
2 tsp1 squeeze (1/8 tsp)
1 Tbsp1/6 tsp
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda French Vanilla Liquid Sweetener
1 tsp1/2 squeeze (1/16 tsp)
2 tsp1 squeeze (1/8 tsp)
1 Tbsp1/6 tsp
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Stevia Liquid Sweetener
1 tsp1/2 squeeze (1/16 tsp)
2 tsp1 squeeze (1/8 tsp)
1 Tbsp1/6 tsp
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Stevia French Vanilla Liquid Sweetener
1 tsp1/2 squeeze (1/16 tsp)
2 tsp1 squeeze (1/8 tsp)
1 Tbsp1/6 tsp
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Stevia Energy Liquid Sweetener
1 tsp1/2 squeeze (1/16 tsp)
2 tsp1 squeeze (1/8 tsp)
1 Tbsp1/6 tsp
Amount of SugarAmount of Splenda Monk Fruit Liquid Sweetener
1 tsp1/2 squeeze (1/16 tsp)
2 tsp1 squeeze (1/8 tsp)
1 Tbsp1/6 tsp

Click to Play Video

Try Splenda Original Sweeteners

It Starts with Splenda! Whether it’s a sweet cup of coffee or a delicious dessert, you can enjoy sweetness without sacrificing taste.

Sours: https://www.splenda.com/product/splenda-sweetener-packets/
Splenda and Diabetes

Sucralose (Splenda): Good or Bad?

Excessive amounts of added sugar can have harmful effects on your metabolism and overall health.

For this reason, many people turn to artificial sweeteners like sucralose.

However, while authorities claim that sucralose is safe to eat, some studies have linked it to health problems.

This article takes an objective look at sucralose and its health effects — both good and bad.

What is sucralose?

Sucralose is a zero calorie artificial sweetener, and Splenda is the most common sucralose-based product.

Sucralose is made from sugar in a multistep chemical process in which three hydrogen-oxygen groups are replaced with chlorine atoms.

It was discovered in 1976 when a scientist at a British college allegedly misheard instructions about testing a substance. Instead, he tasted it, realizing that it was highly sweet.

The companies Tate & Lyle and Johnson & Johnson then jointly developed Splenda products. It was introduced in the United States in 1999 and is one of the most popular sweeteners in the country.

Splenda is commonly used as a sugar substitute in both cooking and baking. It’s also added to thousands of food products worldwide.

Sucralose is calorie-free, but Splenda also contains the carbohydrates dextrose (glucose) and maltodextrin, which brings the calorie content up to 3.36 calories per gram ().

However, the total calories and carbs Splenda contributes to your diet are negligible, as you only need tiny amounts each time.

Sucralose is 400–700 times sweeter than sugar and doesn’t have a bitter aftertaste like many other popular sweeteners (, ).


Sucralose is an artificial sweetener. Splenda is the most popular product made from it. Sucralose is made from sugar but contains no calories and is much sweeter.

Effects on blood sugar and insulin

Sucralose is said to have little or no effects on blood sugar and insulin levels.

However, this may depend on you as an individual and whether you’re used to consuming artificial sweeteners.

One small study in 17 people with severe obesity who didn’t regularly consume these sweeteners reported that sucralose elevated blood sugar levels by 14% and insulin levels by 20% ().

Several other studies in people with average weight who didn’t have any significant medical conditions have found no effects on blood sugar and insulin levels. However, these studies included people who regularly used sucralose (, , ).

If you don’t consume sucralose on a regular basis, it’s possible that you may experience some changes to your blood sugar and insulin levels.

Yet, if you’re used to eating it, it probably won’t have any effect.


Sucralose may raise blood sugar and insulin levels in people who don’t consume artificial sweeteners regularly. However, it probably has no effect on people who regularly use artificial sweeteners.

Baking with sucralose may be harmful

Splenda is considered to be heat resistant and good for cooking and baking. However, recent studies have challenged this.

It seems that at high temperatures, Splenda starts to break down and interact with other ingredients ().

One study found that heating sucralose with glycerol, a compound found in fat molecules, produced harmful substances called chloropropanols. These substances may raise cancer risk (9).

More research is needed, but it may be best to use other sweeteners instead when baking at temperatures above 350°F (175°C) in the meantime (10, ).


At high temperatures, sucralose may break down and generate harmful substances that could increase your risk of cancer.

Does sucralose affect gut health?

The friendly bacteria in your gut are extremely important for your overall health.

They may improve digestion, benefit immune function and reduce your risk of many diseases (, ).

Interestingly, one rat study found that sucralose may have negative effects on these bacteria. After 12 weeks, rats that consumed the sweetener had 47–80% fewer anaerobes (bacteria that don’t require oxygen) in their guts ().

Beneficial bacteria like bifidobacteria and lactic acid bacteria were significantly reduced, while more harmful bacteria seemed to be less affected. What’s more, the gut bacteria had still not returned to normal levels after the experiment was completed ().

Yet, human research is necessary.


Animal studies link sucralose to negative effects on the bacterial environment in the gut. However, human studies are needed.

Does sucralose make you gain or lose weight?

Products that contain zero-calorie sweeteners are often marketed as being good for weight loss.

However, sucralose and artificial sweeteners don’t seem to have any major effects on your weight.

Observational studies have found no connection between artificial sweetener consumption and body weight or fat mass, but some of them report a small increase in Body Mass Index (BMI) ().

A review of randomized controlled trials, the gold standard in scientific research, reports that artificial sweeteners reduce body weight by around 1.7 pounds (0.8 kg) on average ().


Sucralose and other artificial sweeteners don’t seem to have any major effects on body weight.

Is sucralose safe?

Like other artificial sweeteners, sucralose is highly controversial. Some claim that it’s entirely harmless, but new studies suggest that it may have some effects on your metabolism.

For some people, it may raise blood sugar and insulin levels. It may also damage the bacterial environment in your gut, but this needs to be studied in humans.

The safety of sucralose at high temperatures has also been questioned. You may want to avoid cooking or baking with it, as it may release harmful compounds.

That being said, the long-term health effects are still unclear, but health authorities like the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) do consider it to be safe.


Health authorities consider sucralose to be safe, but studies have raised questions about its health effects. The long-term health effects of consuming it are unclear.

The bottom line

If you like the taste of sucralose and your body handles it well, it’s probably fine to use in moderation. There’s certainly no clear cut evidence that it’s harmful to humans.

However, it may not be a good choice for high heat cooking and baking.

Additionally, if you notice persistent problems related to your gut health, talk to your healthcare provider about exploring whether sucralose could be the reason.

If you choose to avoid sucralose or artificial sweeteners in general, there are plenty of great alternatives.

Sours: https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/sucralose-good-or-bad

Calories splenda


brand of sugar substitute

Splenda is a global brand of sugar substitutes and reduced-calorie food products. While they are known for their original formulation containing sucralose, they also manufacture items using natural sweeteners such as stevia, monk fruit, and allulose. It is owned by the American company Heartland Food Products Group. The high-intensity sweetener ingredient sucralose used in Splenda Original is manufactured by the British company Tate & Lyle.

Sucralose was discovered by Tate & Lyle and researchers at Queen Elizabeth College, University of London, in 1976. Tate & Lyle subsequently developed sucralose-based Splenda products in partnership with Johnson & Johnson subsidiary McNeil Nutritionals, LLC.[1] The Splenda brand was transferred to Heartland Food Products Group after their purchase of the line with investor Centerbridge Partners in 2015.

Since its approval by the United States government in 1998[2] and introduction there in 1999, sucralose has overtaken Equal in the $1.5-billion artificial sweetener market, holding a 62% market share.[3] According to market research firm IRI, Splenda sales were $212 million in 2006 in the U.S. while Equal's totaled $48.7 million.[4] According to a 2012 article in The New Zealand Herald it is "the category leader in table-top sweetener in the US".[5]


Splenda is available in a variety of products,[6] including:

  • Splenda Original Sweeteners (based on sucralose)
  • Splenda Stevia Sweeteners
  • Splenda Monk Fruit Sweeteners
  • Splenda Allulose Sweeteners
  • Splenda Liquid Sweeteners
  • Splenda Coffee Creamers
  • Splenda Diabetes Care Shakes
  • Splenda Premium Sweet Teas

Energy (caloric) content[edit]

The energy content of a single-serving (1 g packet) of Splenda is 3.36 kcal, which is 31% of a single-serving (2.8 g packet) of granulated sugar (10.8 kcal).[7] In the United States, it is legally labelled "zero calories";[7] U.S. FDA regulations allow this "if the food contains less than 5 Calories per reference amount customarily consumed and per labeled serving".[8] 3.2 packets (3.36 kcal each) of Splenda contain the same caloric content as one packet of sugar (10.8 kcal). Further, Splenda contains a relatively small amount of sucralose, little of which is metabolized; virtually all of Splenda's caloric content derives from the dextrose or highly fluffed maltodextrin "bulking agents" that give Splenda its volume. Like other carbohydrates, dextrose and maltodextrin have 3.75 kcal per gram.


Unlike other artificial sweeteners, sucralose is heat stable up to 450 °F (232 °C), so Splenda can be used as a replacement for table sugar in cooking and baking,[9] and there are Splenda products packaged specifically for this purpose.[10] In product testing by Cook's Illustrated, the major drawback to cooking with Splenda was found to be that it does not produce the browning or caramelization the way table sugar does.[11] However, Cook's Illustrated also found that desserts baked with Splenda were "lacking the artificial flavors that just about every other sugar substitute brings with it".[11]

Health and safety regulation[edit]

See also: Sucralose § Health, safety, and regulation

Splenda usually contains 95% dextrose (D-glucose) and maltodextrin (by volume) which the body readily metabolizes, combined with a small amount of mostly indigestible sucralose. Sucralose is made by replacing three select hydrogen-oxygen groups on sucrose (table sugar) molecules with three chlorine atoms.[12] The tightly bound chlorine atoms create a molecular structure that is stable under intense conditions. Sucralose itself is recognized as safe to ingest as a diabetic sugar substitute,[13][14] but the sugars or other carbohydrates used as bulking agents in Splenda products should be evaluated individually. The recommended amount of sucralose that can be consumed on a daily basis over a person's lifetime without any adverse effects is 900 mg/kg BW/day, or about 60 g for a 70 kg (150 lb) person.[15]

A repeated dose study of sucralose in human subjects concluded that "there is no indication that adverse effects on human health would occur from frequent or long-term exposure to sucralose at the maximum anticipated levels of intake".[16] Conversely, a Duke University animal study funded by the Sugar Association[17] found evidence that doses of Splenda between 100 and 1000 mg/kg BW/day, containing sucralose at 1.1 to 11 mg/kg BW/day, fed to rats reduced fecal microflora, increased the pH level in the intestines, contributed to increases in body weight, and increased levels of P-glycoprotein (P-gp).[18] These effects have not been reported in humans.[16] In response, McNeil Nutritionals, along with an expert panel that included scientists from Duke University, Rutgers University, New York Medical College, Harvard School of Public Health, and Columbia University reported in Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology that the Duke study was "not scientifically rigorous and is deficient in several critical areas that preclude reliable interpretation of the study results".[19] The other ingredients in Splenda—dextrose and maltodextrin—are listed as generally recognized as safe because of their long history of safe consumption.[20][21]

Sucralose may not be completely biologically inert, and a study showed that cooking with sucralose at high temperatures could cause it to degrade into potentially toxic compounds.[22] However, only a very small amount (approximately 2–8% of sucralose consumed) is metabolized by the body, on average,[23] and the amount of sucralose present in Splenda is slight.

Marketing controversy[edit]

In 2006, Merisant, the maker of Equal, filed suit against McNeil Nutritionals in U.S. District Court, Philadelphia, alleging that Splenda's tagline; "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar" is misleading. McNeil argued during the trial that it had never deceived consumers or set out to deceive them, since the product is in fact made from sugar. Merisant asked that McNeil be ordered to surrender profits and modify its advertising. The case ended with an agreement reached outside of court, with undisclosed settlement conditions.[24] The lawsuit was the latest move in a long-simmering dispute. In 2004, Merisant filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau regarding McNeil's advertising. McNeil alleged that Merisant's complaint was in retaliation for a ruling in federal court in Puerto Rico, which forced Merisant to stop packaging Equal in packages resembling Splenda's. McNeil filed suit in Puerto Rico seeking a ruling which would declare its advertising to not be misleading. Following Merisant's lawsuit in Philadelphia, McNeil agreed to a jury trial and to the dismissal of its lawsuit in Puerto Rico. However, on May 11, 2007, the parties reached a settlement on the case, the terms of which were not disclosed.[4] Currently, Splenda is advertised with the slogan, "It starts with sugar. It tastes like sugar. but it's not sugar."[25]

In 2007, Merisant France prevailed in the Commercial Court of Paris against subsidiaries of McNeil Nutritionals LLC. The court awarded Merisant $54,000 in damages and ordered the defendants to cease advertising claims found to violate French consumer protection laws, including the slogans; "because it comes from sugar, sucralose tastes like sugar" and "With sucralose: comes from sugar and tastes like sugar".[26]

A Sugar Association complaint to the Federal Trade Commission stated that "Splenda is not a natural product. It is not cultivated or grown and it does not occur in nature."[27] McNeil Nutritionals, the manufacturer of Splenda, has responded that its "advertising represents the products in an accurate and informative manner and complies with applicable advertising rules in the countries where Splenda brand products are marketed."[28] The Sugar Association created a web site to criticise sucralose which cites an association-sponsored study.[29]


  1. ^Tate and Lyle history
  2. ^"FDA Approves Sucralose". U.S. Food and Drug Administration. April 1, 1998. Archived from the original on 2008-02-23.
  3. ^Browning, Lynnley (April 6, 2007), Makers of Artificial Sweeteners Go to Court, New York Times Business section
  4. ^ abJohnson,Avery (April 6, 2007), How Sweet It Isn't, Wall Street Journal, Marketplace Section, p.B1
  5. ^Christopher Adams (Aug 28, 2012), US launch sweet news for kiwi supplier, The New Zealand Herald
  6. ^"SPLENDA Products | SPLENDA® Brand". No Calorie Sweetener & Sugar Substitute | SPLENDA. Retrieved 2020-06-03.
  7. ^ abUSDA Nutrient Data Laboratory DatabaseUnited States Department of Agriculture
  8. ^Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Volume 2, Pg. 95 – 101.60 U.S. Food and Drug Administration
  9. ^JoAnna M. Lund & Barbara Alpert (2004). Cooking Healthy with Splenda. Perigee Trade. ISBN .
  10. ^"Cooking and Baking Tips". Splenda.com.
  11. ^ ab"Splenda". Cook's Illustrated. January 1, 2004.
  12. ^"Everything You Need to Know About Sucralose". foodinsight.org. International Food Information Council. 26 November 2018. Retrieved 2020-01-03.
  13. ^Grotz, V Lee; Henry, Robert R; McGill, Janet B; Prince, Melvin J; Shamoon, Harry; Trout, J Richard; Pi-Sunyer, F Xavier (2003). "Lack of effect of sucralose on glucose homeostasis in subjects with type 2 diabetes". Journal of the American Dietetic Association. 103 (12): 1607–12. doi:10.1016/j.jada.2003.09.021. PMID 14647086.
  14. ^Roberts, Ashley (1999). "Sucralose and diabetes". Foods & Food Ingredients Journal of Japan. 182: 49–55.
  15. ^Goldsmith, L. A. (2000). "Acute and subchronic toxicity of sucralose". Food and Chemical Toxicology. 38 Suppl 2: S53–69. doi:10.1016/s0278-6915(00)00028-4. ISSN 0278-6915. PMID 10882818.
  16. ^ abBaird, I. M.; Shephard, N. W.; Merritt, R. J.; Hildick-Smith, G. (2000). "Repeated dose study of sucralose tolerance in human subjects". Food and Chemical Toxicology. 38 (Suppl. 2): S123–9. doi:10.1016/S0278-6915(00)00035-1. PMID 10882825.
  17. ^Browning, Lynnley (2008-09-02). "New Salvo in Splenda Skirmish". The New York Times. Retrieved 2010-05-24.
  18. ^Abou-Donia, MB; El-Masry, EM; Abdel-Rahman, AA; McLendon, RE; Schiffman, SS (2008). "Splenda alters gut microflora and increases intestinal p-glycoprotein and cytochrome p-450 in male rats". J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A. 71 (21): 1415–29. doi:10.1080/15287390802328630. PMID 18800291. S2CID 11909980.
  19. ^Daniells, Stephen (2009-09-02). "Sucralose safety 'scientifically sound': Expert panel".
  20. ^21 CFR184.1444
  21. ^21 CFR184.1857
  22. ^Susan S. Schiffman; Kristina I. Rother (2013). "Sucralose, A Synthetic Organochlorine Sweetener: Overview Of Biological Issues". Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health Part B: Critical Reviews. 16 (7): 399–451. doi:10.1080/10937404.2013.842523. PMC 3856475. PMID 24219506.
  23. ^Michael A. Friedman, Lead Deputy Commissioner for the FDA, Food Additives Permitted for Direct Addition to Food for Human Consumption; Sucralose Federal Register: 21 CFR Part 172, Docket No. 87F-0086, April 3, 1998
  24. ^Browning, Lynnley (May 12, 2007) Artificial Sweetener Makers Reach Settlement on Slogan, New York Times
  25. ^Splenda.com
  26. ^Heller, Lorraine (May 14, 2007) Splenda ad slogans banned in France, Food Navigator
  27. ^Splenda Ads Condemned as Misleading to Consumers by International Advertising Boards, Sugar Farmers and Processors, Sugar Association Press Release, November 2, 2006
  28. ^Sugar industry files complaint over Splenda, Reuters (NBC News), Nov. 2, 2006
  29. ^"The Truth About SplendaArchived 2005-04-22 at the Wayback Machine" website by the Sugar Association

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Splenda.
Sours: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splenda
The Science Behind Artificial Sweeteners - Are They Safe? Are They Making Us Fat?

Is Splenda safe?

We include products we think are useful for our readers. If you buy through links on this page, we may earn a small commission. Here’s our process.

With the growing trends of obesity and type 2 diabetes, many people are looking to alternative sweeteners to ease their sugar cravings.

Sucralose, known by the brand name Splenda, is an artificial sweetener approved for general use as a sugar substitute. But is Splenda safe?

Here we explain what Splenda is, how it is used, and what the science says about this sugar substitute. We also compare it with stevia, another popular sugar alternative.

What is Splenda?

Splenda is a brand name artificial sweetener. It is used as a sugar substitute by people looking for low-calorie alternatives to their daily sweet treats.

Sweeteners like Splenda mimic the sweetness of sugar, without the calories.

The sweetness of Splenda is due to a compound called sucralose, a type of indigestible artificial sugar. This is made by replacing certain atoms in sugar with atoms of chlorine.

Sucralose is also combined with other digestible sweeteners like maltodextrin to make Splenda. Splenda is approximately as sweet as sugar; this is why sweeteners such as Splenda are known as high-intensity sweeteners.

Since it was introduced in 1998, Splenda has become one of the most popular artificial sweeteners on the market.


Splenda is a general sweetener that can be found in everything from baked goods to beverages. Frozen desserts, chewing gum, and gelatins are also commonly sweetened with Splenda; diet foods of all sorts contain the sweetener.

While many artificial sweeteners taste sweet when stirred into coffee or tea, many cannot be used in other ways; this is because many of them lose their sweetness when heated. Splenda, on the other hand, is stable at temperatures up to 450 degrees Fahrenheit. Because of this, Splenda is a favored sugar alternative in many recipes.

However, there are some drawbacks to using Splenda to replace sugar. Artificial sweeteners do not act the same way that plain table sugar does. For instance, artificial sweeteners may not caramelize or brown like sugar.


The sucralose in Splenda is one of five artificial sweeteners that have been approved for use in the U.S. The others are:

  • Aspartame
  • Neotame
  • Saccharin
  • Acesulfame potassium

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) concluded that Splenda was safe after reviewing a large body of information, including toxicology reports, trials, and clinical studies. Splenda was approved for general use in 1999 and has not been removed from the list since then.


From its discovery until very recently, Splenda was regarded as safe to consume. This may not be entirely true, however.

Splenda has always been considered to be biologically inert, meaning it passes through the human body untouched. However, a recent article posted to the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health noted that some of the ingested sweetener is metabolized, meaning that it is not entirely inert.

There are other interactions that medical researchers are currently investigating; for instance, ingested sucralose has been linked to altered intestinal microbe levels in mice; and it is believed that cooking with sucralose may produce toxic compounds called chloropropanols.

Human and rodent studies also indicate that sucralose might in the blood. More research is needed to confirm these findings, but this challenges the idea that the compound is inert.

Recent research, published in the International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health, suggests that Splenda may play a role in certain cancers.

The researchers fed mice various levels of sucralose and noted any effects the sweetener had across their lifespan.

Overall, the team noted an increase in malignant cancers as their intake of sucralose increased. Specifically, the researchers found a higher incidence of leukemia in male mice associated with sucralose intake.

The teams’ findings go against the known data on sucralose up until this point; they note that, due to the popularity of Splenda, follow-up studies should be seen as urgent. Human studies will be necessary to establish the connection, if any, between cancer and sucralose.

Largely due to this study, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) recently downgraded the safety rating of sucralose for a second time, from “caution” to “avoid.” However, Michael F. Jacobsen, the president of CSPI noted that:

“The risk posed by over-consumption of sugar and high-fructose corn syrup, particularly from soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages, of diabetes, heart disease, and obesity, far outweighs the cancer risk posed by sucralose and most other artificial sweeteners.”

For this reason, Splenda may still be the option of choice for people looking to consume soft drinks and sugary beverages without the calories and increase in blood glucose levels. However, water, unsweetened tea, and carbonated water with a splash of fruit juice are all healthy options that can replace sugary beverages or beverages sweetened with artificial sweeteners such as Splenda.

Splenda vs. stevia

Another sweetener that has gained popularity recently is stevia. Stevia-based products are not based on sugar at all, but rather from the plant Stevia rebaudiana. Known simply as yerba dulce in its native South America, stevia is being explored as a relatively new sweetener option.

The sweetness in stevia comes from natural compounds called steviol glycosides, which are extracted from the plant to create various sweeteners. Like Splenda, steviol glycosides are non-nutritive sweeteners, meaning they provide no dietary calories.

These stevia extracts are 200-400 times sweeter than table sugar. Extracts of stevia which are 95 percent steviol glycosides are generally recognized as considered safe (GRAS) by the FDA. Products containing steviol glycosides are usually referred to as the sweetener “stevia,” rather than the plant itself.

It is important to note that, although the entire stevia leaf itself is traditionally used, this is not considered GRAS. Import of the whole leaf or crude extracts to the U.S. is not permitted, though the whole plant can be purchased and grown.

Those with type 2 diabetes or who want to lose weight may consider Splenda and stevia as options, as both provide a sweet sensation without the increased calories or sugar.

When comparing Splenda and stevia, sweetness is one of the things to consider.

Sucralose is 600 times as sweet as sugar, and stevia is 200-400 times as sweet, so less Splenda is needed initially to satisfy the palette. Over time, however, high-intensity sweeteners change how the brain responds to sweet tastes and can increase overall sweet cravings.

The acceptable daily intake (ADI) of Splenda, established by the FDA, is slightly higher than that of stevia. The average person can consume approximately 23 servings of Splenda each day (1 serving = 1 tabletop sweetening packet). For stevia, the number of servings per day is nine. Yet, at intake levels lower than the ADI, changes in gut bacteria and weight gain have been observed in studies for both Splenda and stevia.

Consuming too much stevia may lead to nausea, bloating, dizziness, muscle pain, and numbness.

Consuming too much of any artificial sweetener may cause diarrhea, bloating, gas, or have a laxative effect in some people. There is also the possibility of an allergic reaction, so it is important to pay attention to any changes in the body.

If an individual experiences an adverse side effect, they should consult a doctor.

The products listed in this article are available for purchase online.

Sours: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/262475

Now discussing:


2535 2536 2537 2538 2539