I feel like this comes up a lot, and with so many different types of sweeteners out there how do you know which one you should be using? Here are the facts about some of the most common artificial sweeteners, their speculated health risks, and truth about how it applys to you.
Saccharin (Sweet'N Low, Sweet Twin, Necta Sweet)
300 to 500 times sweeter than sugar
This is where the rumors began- studies during the 1970s done in laboratory rats during linked saccharin with the development of bladder cancer. This lead to Congress mandating that all food containing saccharin have a warning label stating “Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin, which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals.”
While studies in rats showed an increased incidence of bladder cancer at high doses of saccharin, mechanistic studies have shown that these results apply only to rats. Human studies have shown no consistent evidence that saccharin is associated with bladder cancer incidence. In 2000, Saccharin was taken off the list unsafe products by the U.S. National Toxicology Program’s Report on Carcinogens (1).
Aspartame (Equal, Nutasweet)
200 times sweeter than sugar
Aspartame was approved by the FDA in 1981 and questioning related to its safety arose from a 1996 report suggesting that an increase in the number of people with brain tumors in might be associated with the introduction and use of this sweetener. However, after further analysis, it was realized that the then-current NCI statistics showed that the overall incidence of brain and central nervous system cancers actually began to rise in 1973, 8 years prior to the approval of aspartame. A newer study done in 2005 found more lymphomas and leukemia in rats fed very high doses of aspartame (2). However, these was only see at extremely high doses- the equivalent to drinking 8 to 2,083 cans of diet soda daily and there was no dose-dependent response associated. That is, researchers did not find that the number of cancer cases rose with increasing amounts of aspartame. The main health concern associated with Aspartame is that it is metabolized and broken down into phenyalanine and therefore should be avoided by those who have the rare genetic disease Phenylketoniuria (PKU).
Sucralose (Splenda)
600 times sweeter than sugar
This is the newest artificial sweetener on the market and held in high regard as the safest. While some studies claim that sucralose is not fully broken down, metabolisms studies have revealed that it does not accumulate in the body (3). Studies done on acute toxicity revealed no adverse effects (4), and long term studies done in rats suggest that surcralose is safe for pregnant women (5). Furthermore, FDA has specifically noted that it has found sucralose safe for use by children, and people with diabetes (6).
- All of the artificial sweeteners mentioned above are approved by the FDA and have established Acceptable Daily Intakes (ADIs), which is level that a person can safely consume everyday over a lifetime without risk. Five nonnutritive sweeteners with intense sweetening power have FDA approval and are supported by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietitetics (7).
5 most common artificial sweeteners
| Type | kcal/g | Regulatory status | Other names | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saccharin | 0 | Approved as a sweetener for beverages and as a tabletop sweetener in foods with specific maximum amounts allowed | Sweet and Low, Sweet Twin, Sweet ‘N Low Brown, Necta Sweet | 200–700 times sweeter than sucrose; noncariogenic and produces no glycemic response; synergizes the sweetening power of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners; sweetening power is not reduced with heating |
| Aspartame | 4 | Approved as a general-purpose sweetener | Nutrasweet, Equal, Sugar Twin (Blue box) | 160–220 times sweeter than sucrose; noncariogenic and produces limited glycemic response |
| Acesulfame-K | 0 | Approved as a general-purpose sweetener | Sunett, Sweet & Safe, Sweet One | 200 times sweeter than sucrose; noncariogenic and produces no glycemic response; synergizes the sweetening power of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners; sweetening power is not reduced with heating. |
| Sucralose | 0 | Approved as a general-purpose sweetener | Splenda | 600 times sweeter than sucrose; noncariogenic and produces no glycemic response; sweetening power is not reduced with heating |
| Neotame | 0 | Approved as general-purpose sweetener | Not available at time of publication | 8,000 times sweeter than sucrose; noncariogenic and produces no glycemic response; sweetening power is not reduced with heating |
Acesulfame-K
200 times sweeter than sugar
Approved by the FDA in 1988, this sweetener is often found used in combinations with other artificial sweeteners due to its intense sweetness and different flavor. The "K" stands for potassium, which is not absorbed but excreted in the urine, so it does not contribute to potassium levels (8).
Neotame
7,000-13,000 times sweeter than sugar
Neotame is the newest artificial sweetener to hit the market. Receiving FDA approval in 2002, neotame is is marketed to provide a clean sweet taste without bitter off flavors (9), and is recognized as safe for by individuals with PKU.
Benefits for Consumers
There are benefits to using artificial sweeteners, the most obvious being weight control. Artificial sweeteners have virtually no calories, in contrast to regular table sugar which contrains 4 calories per gram. A teaspoon of sugar is about 4 grams.
- Now, consider that one 12-ounce can of a coke which contains 8 teaspoons of added sugar, or about 130 calories. If you're trying to lose weight or prevent weight gain, products sweetened with artificial sweeteners may be an attractive option. While you may have heard that some research has suggests consuming artificial sweeteners may be associated with weight gain, these studies are not yet conclusive.
- Sugar alcohols are different from artificial sweeteners in that they provide some calories. They contain less energy than sugars and have other potential health benefits such as reduced glycemic response, decreased dental caries, prebiotic effects (7).
- The reason they contain less calories then normal sugars is due to the fact that they are only partially absorbed by the gut. However, because of they can cause digestive issues in high doses. This translates to greater than 50 g/day of sorbitol or greater than 20 g/day of mannitol.
- Products with sorbitol and mannitol may or may not have a label that warns of these effects so read your labels carefully! All sugar alcohols are approved by the FDA and generally recognized as safe (GRAS). However, I would still advice to read the labels of the food you consume, especially if you experience any sort of digestive issues.
- Sugar alcohols are common in sugar free, low sugar candies, jellies, baked goods, frozen treats and gum. You may also see them in powders as a bulking agent. Anything that ends in "ol" is typically a sugar alcohol. Here are a few common ones you'll see:
- xylitol, isomalt, lactitol, maltitol, HSH, erythritol, tagatose, trehalose, mannitol, sorbitol
As of this time, there is no evidence that the artifical sweetners mentioned above contribute to cancer. If it comes in a little pink, blue, or yellow packet, you're fine. I would advise however, that you use them sparingly and beware of products that contain sugar alcohols.
*Next week I will discuss the many forms of "all natural" sweeteners. Stay tuned!
1. Artificial Sweetners and Cancer. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/artificial-sweeteners
2. Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Esposti DD, Lambertini L. Aspartame induces lymphomas and leukaemias in rats. European Journal of Oncology 2005; 10(2):107–116.
3. McLean Baird et al., 2000 I. McLean Baird, N.W. Shephard and R.J. Merritt, Repeated dose study of sucralose tolerance in human subjects. Food Chem. Toxicol. Suppl., 2 (2000), pp. S123–S130.
4. Goldsmith, L.A., 2000. Acute and subchronic toxicity of sucralose. Food Chem.Toxicol. Suppl. 2, S53–S69.
5. Mann, S.W., Yuschak, M.M., Amyes, S.J., Aughton, P., Finn, J.P., 2000a. A carcinogenicity study of sucralose in the CD-1 mouse. Food Chem. Toxicol. Suppl. 2, S91–S98.
6. Grotz, V., & Munro, I. (2009). An overview of the safety of sucralose. Regulations in Toxicology and Pharmocology, 55, 1-5.
7. Duffy, V. & Sigman-Grant, M. (2004). Position Stand of the American Dietetic Association:
Use of Nutritive and Nonnutritive Sweeteners. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 104, 255-275.
8. Walker R. Acesulfame Potassium: WHO Food Additives, Series 28.Available at: www.inchem.org/documents/jecfa/jecmono/v28je13. htm. Accessed March 18, 2003
9. Witt J. Discovery and development of neotame. In: Corti A, ed. Low-calorie Sweeteners: Present and Future. World Rev Nutr Diet.Basel, Switzerland: S. Karger AG; 1999;85:52-57.
No comments:
Post a Comment