I gotta say...the World Vegan News is not precisely what I would call a "Reliable Source of Medical (or animal testing) Information."

The only good looking study I can find on the stuff is this one, which suggests some not negligible renal complications in rats. This does not mean anything about humans, and does not suggest maiming puppies (or even rats, really - the study is in a respected journal which means that it was accepted by a reputable IRB and IUCAC).

Unscientifically speaking, I am sure that the stuff isn't good for you, and I also think it tastes nasty, but I don't think that there is any more evidence that Splenda has been inhumanely tested on puppies than anything else has been.

True. Although the Sunday Mirror did an article on it

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20010805/ai_n14534372

and quoted the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology:

It read: "Dogs were killed after 52 weeks of treatment by exsanguination (draining of blood) while under anaesthesia and examined."

Thousands of monkeys, rabbits, mice and rats were killed during tests in the UK.

Yeah, I did notice that after a full 5 minutes of research I was able to come up with only one 'real' article, from a newspaper in england. But whether or not the stuff is safe is beyond the point: it's really odd that of all the testing companies they could have used they chose the sketchiest.

Greusome as it sounds, exsanguination is a very common and ethically accepted way of sacrificing research animals. They are completely anaesthetised, and don't feel a thing.

Greusome as it sounds, exsanguination is a very common and ethically accepted way of sacrificing research animals. They are completely anaesthetised, and don't feel a thing.

Right. Just repeat that to yourself over and over.

I've never tried Splenda. Isn't that the stuff that says "Tastes like sugar because it's made from sugar" on the packet? Brilliant.