Splenda

Yes.....i think.

YES IT IS! first of all, your body doesn't know how to process false sugars, so it turns it into bad fat. where as real sugar, or brown sugar, which is completely natural, your body processes it in a natural manner...by turning it into energy. your body NEEDS some fat and some sugar. Sugar substitutes do nothing but poison your body, making it harder for your liver to process, and in turn, turning it into BAD FAT. same with diet colas, your body cant make heads or tails of processed foods. If you have to have the sugar in your coffee, a soda, or even put butter on your toast...USE THE REAL THING! all in moderation. you'll be surprised at the results you'll get. if you are trying to lose a few pounds, STOP EATING PROCESSED FOODS!

There are 420 Calories.

10 - 20 calories per packet There are 3.87 kcal per gram of sugar, so the answer depends on the size of the sugar packet, which is apparently not standard. Packets tend to vary from 2-6 grams. According to the USDA website, they list 2.8g packet = 11 kcal

Which would yield 16 kcal/ 4.2g teaspoon, and ~23 kcal/6g packet. Examples:

"Sugar in the raw" brand has 5g = ~19 kcal Domino brand packets have 4g = ~15 kcal

James M. Schlatter

C12H19Cl3O8

One tbsp of Splenda has 1g of carbs.

Sucralos or Aspartame.

The chemical formula of Sucralose, which is found in Splenda and Equal, is C12H19Cl3O8. It has little to no effect on respiration as it is closely related to sugar and does not contain Aspartame.

After many hours of research on both sides of the fence I've come to conclude that Splenda is no more harmful to your body than any other food product on the market that has been chemically, genetically, or metabolically altered. (90% of what we consume without question.)

The only way that this product might be of overwhelming importance is to someone that absolutely refuses to ingest any food product that is not 100% natural.

It is true that three of the hydroxyl groups and the sugar molecules have been replaced by three chlorine atoms, and seems to be the primary basis for it's demise.

Our body, however actually needs chlorine a.k.a. chloride, a.k.a. sodium chloride, a.k.a. salt, in maintaining water balance, and is an essential component of gastric juice.

However it should also be noted that our chlorine intake should not be excessive. (5100 milligrams a day for an average adult.) No more so then our daily intake of sugars, carbs, calorie's, starches, ect, ect... "Everything in moderation" (if your health allows it.) Too much of anything can be hazardous to your health, likewise not enough of the right things can be hazardous to your health.

For the most part Splenda is largely unrecognized by the body. By most accounts only some 15% is absorbed by the body.

The claims of all the adverse affects of Splenda appear to be based on the adverse effects relating to the abundance of chlorine in the body and not Splenda itself, or the fact that it is just plainly "A man made" or "Altered" substance. Additionally all claims against Splenda are very vague and general using terms like "appears to be" or "thought to have been" or "categorized with other" unhealthy food products.

You can find something unhealthy with ANY food product known to man no matter how significant or insignificant it may be, because of the individual effects our bodies have on different foods.

My advise is to use research from all sides, balance and wisdom and see if it's right for you.

It seems that Splenda should last for at least two years when held at room temperature. See Related Links.

I have some packets that are older than that and they seem just fine.

1 cup of Splenda is equal to 24 grams. The bag lists 1 tsp=.5 g.

cancer The long term affects of using substitue sugar can cause cancer.Answer Generally, sugar substitutes have been shown to be safe in moderation. Whether they actually promote weight loss is questionable- one study followed subjects who either switched to diet soda or remained drinking the caloric version. After a year, no difference was observed in the subject's weights, despite the fact that the diet soda group would have been consuming fewer calories. The author's suggested that subjects compensated and would choose high fat foods and other high calorie foods to compensate for the lack of calories in the soda. So yes, if you were to replace all sugar with splenda in your diet, eat the same foods and maintain the same level of activity, you would lose calories. But chances are you'd end up eating more elsewhere and not see any change.

Roughly 48 packets to equal one U.S. Measuring cup

No. Sucralose (Splenda) has no nutritional value.

Splenda is an artificial sweetener and contains no calories so it is lower in calories than sugar. It tastes slightly different than sugar but better than SweetnLow and Equal. i would recommend it in iced tea or fresh squeeze lemonade. It is also great for baking. Splenda is an artificial sweetener and contains no calories so it is lower in calories than sugar. It tastes slightly different than sugar but better than SweetnLow and Equal. i would recommend it in iced tea or fresh squeeze lemonade. It is also great for baking.

4 CUPS

No Splenda is not a reducing sugar.

No. Regular sugar turns to fat, which isn't good for any thing. I also, regular sugar elevates blood sugar and if too much is eaten you'll get a sugar rush

Without some form of sweetener, cookies would be called crackers or biscuits.

Options besides sugar or Splenda include honey, molasses, Stevia and the various "artificial sweeteners."

One would use the product Splenda for sweetening one's tea or coffee without having the negative side effects of normal sugar. Splenda is a sweetener without calories.

Sugar is a Polar compound. I you get the electronegativity of all the elements used and subtract them, and you use the chart given you can see that Sugar is polar. Eg. 3.5-2.1 = 1.4 & 3.5-2.5=1

i have a splenda bag and they say that it is a 1:1 ratio, meaning 1 tablespoon sugar =1 tablespoon splenda, and that it can be used to replace sugar in any recipe. By volume it's the same ratio, but is different by weight, because splenda is lighter.

Sodium and chloride ions make up common table salt. Table sugar contains molecules of glucose and fructose chemically combined. Glucose and fructose contain the elements carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.

Personally I would not. Powdered sugar and Splenda have two unique and different textures and tastes, meaning that you should follow the recipe; if it calls for using powdered sugar to make something and not to dust or to top it with. However instead of topping something in powdered sugar I would use Splenda, even though I believe it is not the best thing for you, instead of powdered sugar since it has no calories-I mean why should you make something that is weighed down in saturated fat and calories even worse for you by adding more sugar that is just finer? I would always add Splenda since it has 0 calories and fat.

EDIT: There are easons other than calories to use Splenda-- ever hear of diabetes?

You can make your own powdered Splenda-- For every 3/4 cup of Splenda, add 2 TBSP corn starch. Put into a blender and pulse until you have the correct consistency.