Weighing in on Artificial Sweeteners
A lot of the discussion on artificial sweeteners is focused on safety issues…many people feel uneasy about the “artificial” aspect of aspartame, acesulfame K, sucralose, etc., which – in turn – has increased the popularity of “natural” alternatives such as stevia. Very few people, however, question the usefulness of low/zero-calorie sweeteners in general, for weight loss/control. It’s taken completely for granted that such products will help us fight the battle of the bulge. It makes sense, after all: non-caloric sweeteners provide the taste sensation we all crave, without the calories that normally go with it. It’s like having a “Get Out of Jail Free” card – we can consume the sweetness equivalent of several hundred calories a day without guilt or consequences.
Is it possible this assumption is flawed?
It’s not definitive…yet, but the research is certainly trending in that direction.
For example, in this recent study, researchers found that mice given artificial sweeteners overate and grew fatter than glucose-fed counterparts.
“Psychologists at Purdue University’s Ingestive Behavior Research Center report that nine rats given yogurt sweetened with no-cal saccharin ended up eating more and gaining more weight and body fat than eight fellow rodents given yogurt containing plain old glucose (a simple sugar with about 15 calories per teaspoon, the same as table sugar).
Study authors Susan Swithers and Terry Davidson speculate the reason is that the faux sweetener messes with the brain, fooling it into revving up the body’s metabolism in anticipation of a never-to-come calorie load.”
Another recent experiment on humans demonstrated that the brain can differentiate sucralose from sucrose, even though the subjects were not aware of the difference. What are the implications of this? According to a JAMA editorial:
“…only sucrose stimulation engages the dopaminergic midbrain areas that respond to food rewards. ‘Thus, brain response distinguishes the caloric from the non-caloric sweetener, although the conscious mind could not,’ the authors wrote. ‘This could have important implications on how effective artificial sweeteners are in their ability to substitute sugar intake,’ they added.
The investigators propose that because sucralose does not provide calories that act as a natural feedback mechanism that results in satiety, other means—such as additional eating—will likely be needed to provide satiety.”
Thus, the most recent research indicates that non-caloric sweetener intake might actually disrupt the body’s ability to assess caloric intake by interfering with sensory cues that influence satiety (i.e., feeling full/satisfied).
In my own “sphere of influence” on the “Bodybuilding Revealed” and “Fat Loss Revealed” forums, I’ve likened zero-calorie sweeteners to methadone: they can be useful for facilitating the transition to a low sugar diet, but are problematic when used as a crutch. This is simply an empirical observation on my part: in my experience, people who use large amounts of sweeteners have the biggest problems with cravings for sweet foods, and have a hard time “taking” to healthy habits like eating fresh vegetables or drinking plain ol’ water. In other words, non-caloric sweeteners help keep a “sweet tooth” alive and kicking, and make it damn near impossible to appreciate the natural (and more subtle) flavors of real foods.
The bottom line is that simply replacing sugar with low-cal sweeteners – whether artificial or natural – isn’t necessarily going to make it easier to reduce your total calorie intake, nor help you learn to enjoy healthy foods. Use them if you must, but with an eye towards reducing your consumption of sweetened foods – period.
