How Sweet Is It?

Danielle Asplund

April 21, 2010

Science Curriculum: LAI 531

How Sweet is It?

How does the information that we are told affect our dietary choices in regard to sugar and sugar substitutes?

If we were more informed about the positive and negative factors of types of sugar and sugar substitutes, would we make healthier choices?

Rational for presentation Science literacy

Public understanding of science Ability to analyze information for quality

Media reports Recent news of health reform NY tax proposal for sugary drinks Shocking new studies briefly discussed in the news

Personal interest Dad – allergic to aspartame Me – cannot tolerate artificial sweeteners

Overview of Sweeteners

Artificial sweeteners include: Sugar alcohols Saccharin Aspartame Acesulfame potassium Sucralose Neotame

Sugar Alcohols

What they are: Carbohydrates with structures similar to sugar and alcohol Examples: sorbitol, mannitol lactitol Uses: chewing gum, hard candies, pharmaceuticals

Benefits: About half the calories found in sugar Can be labeled as sugar-free

Issues: Excessive consumption can cause gas and diarrhea Contain calories though marked as sugar-free

Saccharin

What it is: Sweet’N Low

Benefits: Calorie free Does not increase blood sugar levels Been around for over 100 years (best researched artificial

sweetener) Issues:

Tumors Infants Allergic reactions

Tumors and Cancer

Multiple studies in rats indicate a variety of tumors and cancer related to consumption of saccharin Controversial results due to high levels of sweeteners Ability to relate to humans

Studies in humans have indicated a connection between some artificial sweeteners Excluded as the only contributing factor making artificial

sweeteners to be eliminated as carcinogenic

Infants

Saccharin in infant formula can cause: Irritability Muscular dysfunction

Not enough research to limit use in pregnant women and infant formulas

Allergic Reactions

Found in people who are allergic to sulfonamides

Reactions may include: Headaches Breathing problems Skin rash Diarrhea

Aspartame

What it is: Nutrasweet & Equal Discovered in 1965

Benefits: Caloric intake is negligible

Issues: Intolerable by people with PKU (phenylketonuria) General health concerns

Health Concerns Review of literature indicated:

100% of industry funded research declared aspartame safe 92% of independently funded research declared health

problems with aspartame Headaches

People with migraines have more frequent and severe headaches when using aspartame than when using sugar

Depression Those with mood disorders are more sensitive to

aspartame and have been recommended to avoid it Cancer

Inclusive results Increased hunger

Counter-acts desired weight loss

Neotame

What it is: New version of aspartame Approved in 2002 by FDA

Benefits: Does not cause problems for people with PKU Much sweeter than aspartame

Issues: Discreetly marketed (not well known) Not much research

Acesulfame potassium

What it is: Ace-K Sunett Used as sweetener or to preserve sweetness

Benefits: No calories

Issues: Contains methylene chloride (carcinogen) Not well studied

Sucralose

What it is: Splenda

Benefits: Made from sugar

Issues: Discovery Not calorie free No long term studies Health affects

Discovery of Splenda

Ads state “made from sugar” Found while making insecticides

Treated with at least 12 chemicals Name, sucralose, indicates a sugar

Ends with –ose Some argued the name should be changed to

trichlorogalactosucrose FDA did not find this necessary

Mislabeling

Packaging indicates calorie free 1 cup contains almost 100 calories and more

than 30 grams of carbs Harmful for diabetics

Weight Gain

Rats given Splenda showed multiple side effects: weight gain loss of beneficial microflora in gut an interference of the absorption of nutrients and

pharmaceuticals Same results seen in humans with this and

other artificial sweeteners

Pain Reaction

Healthy human infants feed artificial sweeteners had a reduced pain reaction when pricked on the heel when compared to those feed natural sweeteners Possibly affecting neuro-development

Other studies have indicated no affects seen in brain development or mood when artificial sweeteners were consumed at this stage in life

Long term affects

Most animal trails were short-term Few human trials

Contains chlorine – a carcinogen Reported issues include:

Digestive problems Skin irritations Chest pains Anxiety Mood swings

Environmental Implications

Sucralose has been found in varying levels in a variety of water areas in the US Golf Coast Cape Fear (NC) Florida Keys

No information about the possible affects on marine/aquatic life

Review of Media Reports

Recent local reports focus on proposed legislation 1 cent tax per ounce of a sugary drink Money raised goes to fight obesity

Issues: Government interfering with personal choices Who will be most affected Does not tax sugar-free diet drinks

What now?

Many people are not aware of research on artificial sweeteners and the possible complications Interactions with medications Genetics Absorption of nutrients

Less than half of the public claim to care about the nutrition of their food Education about nutrition needed as well Scientific literacy beginning at an early age is needed

Conclusions

How can we decide what is good for us when we do not understand what we are consuming

Media reports often confuse the general public

Campaigns use information for their benefit People are easily swayed without an honest

reason

References Andreatta, M. M. et al. (2008). Artificial sweetener consumption and urinary tract tumors in

Cordoba, Argentina. Preventative Medicine, 47 (1); 136-139.

Bucher, H. U. et al (2000). Artificial sweetener reduces nociceptive reaction in term newborn infants. Early Human Development, 59 (1); 51-60.

Brusick, D et al (2009). Expert panel report on a study of splenda in male rats. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 55 (1); 6-12.

Duyuff, R. L. (2006). Complete food and nutrition guide. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Grotz, V. L. & Munro, I. C. (2009). An overview of the safety of sucralose. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 55 (1); 1-5.

Hull, J. S. (2001). Sweet Poison. Horizon Press.

Lebovitz, A. D. (2009). Artificial sweeteners: Options for chronic kidney disease patients. Journal of Renal Nutrition, 19 (4);e15-e18.

Mead, R. N. et al. (2009). Occurrence of the artificial sweetener sucralose in costal and marine waters of the United States. Marine Chemistry, 116 (1-4); 13-17.

References Continued Murphy, S. P & Johnson, R. K. (2003). The scientific basis of recent US guidance on

sugars intake. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 78 (4); 827S-833S.

Neuman, W (2009). Proposed tax on sugary beverages debate. New York Times.

Phillips, K. (2008). Trade commission delivers bitter pill to splenda makers. Chemical Week, 170 (31); 44.

Raben, A. et al (2002). Sucrose compared with artificial sweeteners: different effects on ad libitum food intake and body weight after 10 wk of supplementation in overweight subjects. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 76 (4); 721-729.

Riera, C. E. et al. (2008). The capsaicin receptor participates in artificial sweetener aversion. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 376 (4); 653-657.

Saraiva, C & Quint, M. (2010). Paterson-backed sugary beverage tax is “unfair,” opponents say. Bloomberg: Business Week.

Viberg, H & Fredricksson, A. (2010). Neonatal exposure to sucralose does not alter biochemical markers of neuronal development or adult behavior. Nutrition.

Zmuda, N. (2008). Hey that nutrasweet looks like splenda. Advertising Age, 79 (20); 3-44.