Essay About National Academy Of Science Review And Results Of A Long-Term Study

Sweeteners
Essay Preview: Sweeteners
Report this essay
Sweeteners
Saccharin is an organic petroleum-based compound that is three to five
hundred times sweeter than sucrose. It is non-nutritive because the human
body is unable to metabolize the foreign chemical. Saccharin does not
contribute calories; for this reason it is commonly used in diet foods.
“The obese [feel] that saccharin is their lifeline to slimdom, and
diabetics [claim] it is essential to control their blood sugar” (Brody
482). The same people who consume saccharin certainly would not knowingly
eat something that is classified as toxic waste; however, they do it on a
daily basis. Saccharins alias is EPA Hazardous Waste number U202. In
fact, workers who handle saccharin are cautioned, “EXERCISE DUE CARE.
AVOID CONTACT WITH EYES, SKIN, CLOTHING. WASH THOROUGHLY AFTER HANDLING.
IF SWALLOWED, IF CONCIOUS, IMMEDIATELY INDUCE VOMITING” (MSDS).
Saccharin has always been surrounded by controversy. As early as 1907,
the public was concerned over its safety and proposed banning it.
Theodore Roosevelt, a diabetic, fought the idea. He said, “My doctor
gives it to me every dayAnybody who says saccharin is injurious to
health is an idiot”(Corcoran 12). Saccharin survived the onslaught for
another forty years. It wasnt until the bittersweet chemical hit the
mainstream consumer market in such things as diet sodas, pharmaceuticals,
and chewing gum that it came under fire again. Scientists suggested that
saccharin might be a carcinogen in 1951. In 1958, however, saccharin was
added to the GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) list, another paradox.
In 1972, the results of a long-term study showed that rats fed saccharin
had developed bladder tumors. Subsequently, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) removed saccharin from GRAS status and issued a
regulation limiting the use of saccharin in foods. Then in 1974, a
National Academy of Science review found that, “Saccharin itself could not
be identified as the cause of the tumors because of possible impurities as
well as problems with experimental design and procedures” (Kennedy 131).
Therefore, the FDA decided not to ban saccharin until they received the
results of a study being conducted in Canada.
In March 1977, the Canadian study showed that feeding large doses of
saccharin to pregnant rats and their weanlings produced bladder cancers in
the male offspring. The Canadians immediately banned saccharin. When the
FDA announced its intentions to follow suit, public outcry led to a
Congressionally voted eighteen-month moratorium. The American people
wanted more time to evaluate the results of the study. Shortly
thereafter, Congress enacted the Saccharin Study and Labeling Act, which
stayed the FDAs hand temporarily and ordered a warning label on all
saccharin products: “Use of this product may be hazardous to your health.
This product contains saccharin which has been determined to cause cancer
in laboratory animals” (Brody 482-483). Nonetheless, the moratorium has
continually been extended until the present day.
During 1978 and 1979, the National Cancer Institute and FDA conducted a
population-based study on the possible role of saccharin in causing
bladder cancer in humans. In general, people in the study who used an
artificial sweetener had no greater risk of bladder cancer than the
population as a whole. However, when only the data for heavy users was
examined, there was some suggestive evidence of an increased risk,
particularly in persons who consumed both diet drinks and sugar
substitutes and who used at least one of these two forms heavily
(Carcinogenicity). In the study, heavy use was defined as merely six or