Artificial sweeteners may cause weight gain!
A recent article in ACE FitnessMatters (Nov/Dec2009, Vol.15, Issue 6) discussed the neurological difference between sugar and artificial sweeteners, and their effect on weight loss.
New research suggests that the brain may be able to differentiate between real sugar and artificial sweeteners. Dr Paul Smeets, a neuroscientist at the University Medical Center Utrecht in the Netherlands, used brain scans (fMRI) to study this theory. He concluded that only real sugar was perceived by the brain as calories. In other words, while it may taste the same, it appears that the brain cannot be fooled.
So what does that mean for weight management?
When real sugar is consumed, the brain recognizes the calories and provides a sense of satiation (feeling satisfied due to the caloric intake). Artificial sweeteners however may not have that effect. Therefore, they stimulate only the taste which in turn increases your appetite. And in most cases, that will lead to eating more in subsequent meals. This effect may explain the results of previous studies which show that people who regularly consume artificial sweetened drinks tend to weigh a few more pounds on average.
The conclusion?
We may be better off drinking regular sugary drinks. The article suggests that drinking slowly will decrease your overall consumption. For example, drink slower by taking smaller sips or by using a thin straw. If possible of course, it is best to substitute the soft drinks altogether with diluted 100% juice or water.
(Here is another viewpoint: http://health.yahoo.com/experts/drmao/20270/what-soft-drinks-are-doing-to-your-body/)
What are your thoughts on this subject? Post your comments below.
Back to http://yourchoicefitness.com
October 29th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
I agree with the info. In moderation, real sugar is better for everyone, unless they have a medical condition that prevents real sugar useage. I always get a headache or feel sick when I drink or eat anything with artifical sweetner. That should tell you something in its self. Fake is not always better.
November 1st, 2009 at 5:44 pm
This is so true and makes total sense. When I take a drink of diet soda in my mind I’m thinking “there’s barely any calories in here, now I can eat that cookie”! Sugar is sugar, as long as it is in moderation it is better than any chemical you could put in your body! Thanks for the info Nicole!
November 2nd, 2009 at 6:02 pm
While Dr. Smeets’ study is interesting, I think people are leaping to unfounded conclusions. He did not conclude that “only real sugar was perceived by the brain as calories”; all that was concluded was that both sweet taste and energy content (as provided by glucose) was needed to produce a change in the measured hypothalamic activity. Sweet taste alone (aspartame) or energy content alone (maltodextrin) did not produce a change.
It’s possible that this is b/c real sugar induces feelings of satiety while artificial sweeteners do not, but it’s only one of many possibilities. I think you are appropriately cautious in interpreting the data in your “So what does that mean for weight management?” paragraph, but your “conclusion” that we may be better off drinking regular sugary drinks is bizarre and not supported.
In addition, the other two user comments makes me worry that people are automatically going to assume this is true while it is still just a theory that is far from proven.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Research can be very complex. Research results can only suggest a conclusion specific to that particular research study performed. But nothing is ever 100% proven. That’s why research continues. The conclusion offered in this blog post is a summary of the researchers conclusions mentioned in the ACE FitnessMatters article. Please do not misunderstand it as my own opinion. It’s simply food for thoughts, so to speak. My hope is that people who regularly consume a high quantity of artifical sweeteners will at least stop and think about what they are putting in their bodies. At the very least, maybe they will discuss this topic. And maybe it will help them reevaluate how much sugary drinks or foods they are consuming on average and find healthier alternatives. I believe people generally are influence far too much by the term “diet” in front of a food item without ever questioning the potential negative consequences.
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:25 pm
Can you post a link to the ACE FitnessMatters article? It sounds like an interesting read.
I think you’re right, in that people should evaluate more carefully what they are consuming, and they shouldn’t assume that a “diet” label necessarily means the product is healthy.
But, if you really want to start a dialogue on the topic, you might also point out the research studies that do not find a link between non-nutrient sweeteners and weight gain, obesity, or other metabolic disorders.
While you think some people don’t ever question the potential negative consequences of “diet” foods, you should also consider the idea that other people don’t ever question that there are not any potential negative consequences. In other words, maybe you shouldn’t assume non-nutrient sweeteners or “diet” foods necessarily have negative effects.
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:13 pm
I’m not sure if they have an online version of the article since it is a subscription magazine. But here is the link to their subscription sign-up: http://www.acefitness.org/acestore/c-11-subscriptions.aspx
In my experience, people tend to read the front of food/beverage items and then maybe the calorie content. Only a very small percentage of consumers actually read the ingredients list, much less takes the time to research what these mysterious ingredients are. Guidelines for food labeling are far too laid back and can be modified to suit the producers needs. The consumers interests are hardly ever considered. After all, the food industry is a business and sales wouldn’t exactly be satisfying if labeling was about honesty instead of making money. As a general rule of thumb, if something is taken out to make a product more appealing (ex.fat-free), something else still has to be put back in its place to satisfy taste (ex. sugar/artificial sweeteners).
While research may never be completely 100% accurate, I simply find it interesting that obesity rates started to sky-rocked when artificial sweeteners and diet foods become a popular trend in the 80’s. Certainly that is not the only reason for the epidemic but it’s one cause. Side effects of artificial sweeteners have been well documented for years but just like food/beverage producers, the FDA is a business, too. They too can be easily persuaded to label something as safe until enough cases have publicly surfaced that the FDA might have to reconsider their findings and pull a product of the market.
Of course, opinions are going to vary and ultimately, everyone has to make up their own mind what they choose to believe.
November 7th, 2009 at 9:19 pm
I use all types and brand of these artificial sugars are they all bad?
November 8th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Dear Doris,
There are differences in specific types of artificial sweeteners. At this point, some are considered a little bit less risky than others. However, that is an assumption based on current research findings. There were sweeteners on the market a few years ago that used to be considered safe but are now no longer available. Therefore, what I would like you to consider is that no matter what type it is, artificial sweeteners are chemically produced. We really have no way of knowing what the long term affects may be. As a general rule of thumb, natural tends to be better for your body and your long term health.
- Nicole