Overview
Anyone who knows anything about health and fitness knows that the number one enemy of any dieter or trainer is sugar. High levels of glucose, sucrose, or fructose cause fat storage, insulin sensitivity, and increased hunger, eventually leading to obesity and possibly diabetes. But sugar is so prevalent in most of the foods we eat, how do we eliminate the bad and replace it with something good?
The answer lies in the yellow, pink, or blue packets that accompany most of the white and brown packets on the table at any local restaurant. They go by the names Splenda, Sweet’n Low, and Equal, but the real players in this battle of insulin regulation are sucralose, saccharin, and aspartame. Although an “unnatural chemical,” these sweeteners are considerably safer than the sucrose and high-fructose corn syrup you’ll find in most soft drinks, as well as the sugar you put in your coffee. Although timely consumption of high-glycemic carbohydrates has been shown to be beneficial for physically active people, especially before and after workouts, substituting an artificial sweetener in your nutritional plan will provide health benefits that pure sugar simply cannot equalize.
Safety of “Unnatural Chemicals”
Artificial sweeteners have been around since 1879, but it wasn’t until 1970 that there was concern about their use. Products containing saccharin carry warning labels about possibly causing cancer in animals, but saccharin is now absent from many carcinogen lists. Aspartame has been reported to cause brain tumors, but it is still an ingredient in almost all “diet” foods. What about sucralose? Get ready to bust the myths behind these artificial sweeteners and instill more confidence in their use.
The new generation of sweetness
SUCRALOSE
INTRODUCTION
Sucralose, brand name Splenda, is the newest artificial sweetener on the market. It has found its way into a variety of food products, including soft drinks, ice cream and chocolate bars. It is 600 times sweeter than sucrose and has no calories, carbohydrates, fat or protein and does not negatively affect insulin levels. It is made by chlorinating sugar, which replaces three chlorine atoms with three hydroxyl groups to produce 4,1′,6′-trichlorogalacto-sucrose. Sucralose simply passes through the body and is not processed, it is simply consumed and secreted, making it one of the safest artificial sweeteners available. The Splenda brand uses a combination of sucralose and maltodextrin, giving you 2 calories per packet. Sucralose is suitable for all people, including diabetics.
STUDIES
Repeated-dose study of sucralose tolerance in human subjects.
Baird IM, Shephard NW, Merritt RJ, Hildick-Smith G.
Pine Court, Fairbourne, Cobham, Surrey KT11 2BT, UK.
Two tolerance studies were conducted in healthy adult human volunteers. The first study was an ascending dose study conducted in eight subjects, in which sucralose was administered at doses of 1, 2, 5, 5, and 10 mg/kg at 48-hour intervals and followed by a daily dose of 2 mg/kg. kg for 3 days and 5 mg/kg for 4 days. In the second study, subjects consumed sucralose (n=77) or fructose (50 g/day) (n=31) twice daily in a single-blind fashion. Sucralose dosage levels were 125 mg/day for weeks 1 to 3, 250 mg/day for weeks 4 to 7, and 500 mg/day for weeks 8 to 12. No adverse experiences or clinically detectable effects were attributed to sucralose in none of the studies. Similarly, hematology, serum biochemistry, urinalysis, and EKG tracings were unaffected by sucralose administration. In the 13-week study, serial slit-lamp ophthalmologic examination performed in a randomized subset of the study groups revealed no change. Fasting and 2-hour post-dosing blood sucralose concentrations obtained daily during week 12 of the study revealed no upward trend for blood sucralose. Human volunteers tolerated sucralose well in single doses up to 10 mg/kg/day and in repeated doses increasing to 5 mg/kg/day for 13 weeks.
CONCLUSION
Based on these studies and the extensive animal safety database, there is no evidence of adverse human health effects from frequent or prolonged exposure to sucralose at anticipated upper intake levels.
SACCHARIN
INTRODUCTION
Saccharin is the original artificial sweetener and you probably know it as the little pink packets on your table at any restaurant. Saccharin is considered more of a first generation artificial sweetener and does not taste like sugar. It is 300 times sweeter than sucrose and can taste bitter if used too much. Saccharin is no longer found much in any type of processed food or drink. Saccharin has fallen out of favour; ever since the newer artificial sweeteners came out. However, there has been some controversy in the past showing that saccharin caused urinary cancer in rats. However, it was later shown that any type of cancer would only occur at high doses.
STUDIES
A safety factor (uncertainty) derived from data for the intense sweetener, saccharin.
Renwick AG.
Clinical Pharmacology Group, University of Southampton, Bassett Crescent East, UK.
An increased incidence of bladder cancer is found when male rats are fed high dietary concentrations of sodium saccharin (3% or more) from birth. This toxicity has been used as the basis for the development of a safety factor derived from the data. Such an effect would attract an additional factor (10-fold) for the nature of the toxicity and, in the absence of other data, would result in a high overall safety factor. However, the extensive mechanistic database on sodium saccharin allows an assessment of the potential relevance of the effect to humans. Furthermore, the effect is only seen under specific conditions in rats, ie largely with the sodium salt and with a commercial rat diet. The effect is not related to saccharin concentration in rat urine or bladder, thus simplifying toxicokinetic considerations. The extensive animal database allows determination of data-derived factors for interspecies differences in both toxicokinetics and toxicodynamics. Based on this analysis, an overall safety factor of 50 (including the factor of 10 for severity of effect) seems appropriate at this time. This factor, and the ADI that would result from its application, are consistent with the absence of an association between the consumption of artificial sweeteners and bladder cancer in humans.
CONCLUSION
There is no detectable association between consumption of artificial sweeteners and bladder cancer. The summary relative risk from a meta-analysis of all case-control studies is close to unity (RR 0.97). This analysis, combined with new evidence for a unique mechanism of saccharin carcinogenicity in the male rat, leads to the conclusion that saccharin is not associated with bladder cancer in humans (Elcock M, Morgan RW., Environmental Health Strategies, Inc., Redwood City, California 94065).
ASPARTAME
INTRODUCTION
Aspartame, brand name Nutrasweet, has been a widely used artificial sweetener since 1981. It is a derivative of the essential amino acid, phenylalanine, which is commonly found in most protein sources. It was discovered by accident when a chemist combined phenylalanine with aspartic acid (another amino acid), tested it, and determined that it was sweet. Aspartame is 160 times more sweetening than sucrose and is commonly found in diet soft drinks and numerous food products. It has no calories, carbohydrates, protein, or fat and does not increase insulin levels, as sucrose does, making it safe for diabetics to consume. There have been numerous claims that aspartame is dangerous and has caused heart attacks, brain tumors, cancer, and death. The only proven problem with aspartame is with people who have a disorder known as “phenylketonuria.” Phenylketonuria is a human genetic disorder in which the body does not contain the enzyme phenylalanine hydroxylase necessary to metabolize phenylalanine to tyrosine and converts phenylalanine to phenylpyruvic acid. If left untreated, phenylpyruvic acid can cause brain damage and progressive mental retardation as a result of its accumulation. Other than that, aspartame is one of the most clinically studied chemicals in the world, with an excellent overall safety profile.
STUDIES
Aspartame: safety review.
Butchko HH, Stargel WW, Comer CP, Mayhew DA, Benninger C, Blackburn GL, de Sonneville LM, Geha RS, Hertelendy Z, Koestner A, Leon AS, Liepa GU, McMartin KE, Mendenhall CL, Munro IC, Novotny EJ, Renwick AG, Schiffman SS, Schomer DL, Shaywitz BA, Spires PA, Tephly TR, Thomas JA, Trefz FK.
Medical and Scientific Affairs, The NutraSweet Company, Mt Prospect, Illinois 60056, USA [email protected]
It has been more than 20 years since regulatory agencies approved aspartame as a sweetener and flavor enhancer. The safety of aspartame and its metabolic components was established through extensive toxicology studies in laboratory animals, using doses much higher than what people could possibly consume. Its safety was further confirmed through studies in various human subpopulations, including healthy infants, children, adolescents, and adults; obese individuals; diabetes; lactating women; and individuals heterozygous (PKUH) for the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU) who have a decreased ability to metabolize the essential amino acid, phenylalanine. Several scientific questions continued to arise after approval, largely due to concerns about the theoretical toxicity of its metabolic components (amino acids, aspartate and phenylalanine, and methanol), even though dietary exposure to these components is much higher than that of aspartame. However, additional research, including evaluations of possible associations between aspartame and headaches, seizures, behavior, cognition, and mood, as well as allergic-type reactions and use by potentially sensitive subpopulations, has continued after approval. . These findings are reviewed here. Aspartame safety testing has gone far beyond what is required to assess the safety of a food additive.
CONCLUSION
When all of the research on aspartame is taken together, it is clear that aspartame is safe and there are no unanswered questions regarding its safety under intended conditions of use.
A safe artificial sweetener
All of these studies show that sucralose, saccharin, and aspartame are safe to consume in our daily diet. Without getting into other substitutes like cyclamate, acesulfame, stevia, and sugar alcohols, we can confidently choose an artificial sweetener that will taste almost exactly like sugar. Whether it’s in our coffee, our diet sodas, or whatever else we need to eat for our rigorous diets, we can count on a great sweet taste without the calories and insulin spikes.