I just looked them up, too. Two sources, the first two that popped up on Google.
The second, a Buzzle article, says at the bottom, “After all, natural is healthier.” That was enough to make me roll my eyes and ignore everything else in the article. Anthrax is natural – no one is claiming it is healthy. Ending an article with a non-sequitur is not the most effective way to pander your fear-mongering.
The first is part of a long article on natural sweeteners. It says:
“The FDA reviewed studies in human beings and animals and determined that sucralose did not pose carcinogenic, reproductive, or neurological risk to human beings. The Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) for sucralose was set at 5 mg/kg of body weight/day. To determine your ADI, divide your weight in pound by 2.2 and then multiply it by 50. For example, if you weighted 200 lbs., your weight in kg would be 91 (200 divided by 2.2) and your ADI for sucralose would be 455 mg (91×5).”
it also says:
“The majority of studies were done on animals for short lengths of time. The alleged symptoms associated with sucralose are gastrointestinal problems (bloating, gas, diarrhea, nausea), skin irritations (rash, hives, redness, itching, swelling), wheezing, cough, runny nose, chest pains, palpitations, anxiety, anger, moods swings, depression, and itchy eyes. ”
This well-referenced Wiki article also cites the Canadian and Australian equivalents of the FDA, and they all agree that Splenda poses no public health risk, due to the extreme amount one must consume to trigger adverse effects shown in laboratory tests. “The dose required to provoke any immunological response was 750 mg/kg/day,[23] or 51 grams of sucralose per day, which is nearly 4,300 Splenda packets/day for one month.”