Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
i wish i had something on that. i'm relying on gut health 'experts' that i respect, plus logic.
logic -- sugar/honey/naturals versus chemicals? these are powerful chemicals that are magnitudes more sweet than sugar. that aint free - it plays in the glucose/insulin arena
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
i took a quick peek and found this. not surprised fake sugar makes insulin resistance worse.
Effect of artificial sweeteners on insulin resistance among type-2 diabetes mellitus patients
Results: The HOMAIR values for Group A and B ranged from 0.9-24.33 and 0.12-10.83 with mean values 7.39 and 2.6, respectively, showing that the ones who used AS had a higher insulin resistance. The study also showed that the duration of use of artificial sweeteners had a direct impact on insulin resistance.
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
An increasing body of evidence indicates that NAS can alter the mammalian gut microbiome composition, function, and metabolome, which can, in turn, influence host metabolic health.
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
Recent findings: Although artificial sweeteners were developed as a sugar substitute to help reduce insulin resistance and obesity, data in both animal models and humans suggest that the effects of artificial sweeteners may contribute to metabolic syndrome and the obesity epidemic. Artificial sweeteners appear to change the host microbiome, lead to decreased satiety, and alter glucose homeostasis, and are associated with increased caloric consumption and weight gain.
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
Here we investigated four commonly used artificial sweeteners (saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, and acesulfame potassium) against both Gram-negative (Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae) and positive (Bacillus subtilis) strains. Results show that all four sweeteners exhibit antimicrobial effects on these strains.
The antimicrobial mechanism is due to increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) and cell envelope damage. Compared to sucrose and glucose, the treatment of artificial sweeteners stimulates bacterial efflux pumps and promotes bacterial evolution of antibiotic tolerance. Collectively, our finding provides insights into roles of artificial sweeteners in the emergence of antibiotic tolerance and calls for a re-evaluation of risks due to their intensive usage.
Because there are several types of sweeteners which affect your body in different ways. Most studies focus on just one or two kinds, but the headline always seems to indict them all.
Like this thread title says "sweetener", but cites a study specifically about sucralose.
I'd like to see a gut health study that looks at different types of sweeteners, including that nasty sugar.
New Research Uncovers Dangers of Artificial Sweeteners – Potentially Leading to Serious Health Issues
Previous studies have shown that artificial sweeteners can change the number and type of bacteria in the gut, but this new molecular research, led by academics from Anglia Ruskin University (ARU), has demonstrated that sweeteners can also make the bacteria pathogenic. It found that these pathogenic bacteria can attach themselves to, invade, and kill Caco-2 cells, which are epithelial cells that line the wall of the intestine.
Here we investigated four commonly used artificial sweeteners (saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, and acesulfame potassium) against both Gram-negative (Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae) and positive (Bacillus subtilis) strains. Results show that all four sweeteners exhibit antimicrobial effects on these strains.
The antimicrobial mechanism is due to increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) and cell envelope damage. Compared to sucrose and glucose, the treatment of artificial sweeteners stimulates bacterial efflux pumps and promotes bacterial evolution of antibiotic tolerance. Collectively, our finding provides insights into roles of artificial sweeteners in the emergence of antibiotic tolerance and calls for a re-evaluation of risks due to their intensive usage.
Cool, this one actually lists the sweeteners they tested; the other abstracts just said "artificial sweeteners". So we can conclude that these specific sweeteners have a negative effect on the microbome.
I use stevia because my trusted experts say it is different from the ones listed, and should not have the same effects. But that might be disproved at any moment.
Incidentally, this abstract says the sweeteners kill e. coli and pneumonia, so not entirely bad, though they say it kills at least one beneficial strain as well.
I do know that not all artificial sweeteners are "equal." Cyclamates - those are proven to cause cancer. But so is beef. So are other things.
Although that is what was thought in the late 60s and into the 1970s when it was banned, it has been known since about the mid-80s that cyclamates are not a carcinogen. This is from the National Cancer Institute:
Concerns about artificial sweeteners and cancer initially arose when early studies linked the combination of cyclamate plus saccharin (and, to a lesser extent, cyclamate alone) with the development of bladder cancer in laboratory animals, particularly male rats.
As a result of these findings, cyclamate was banned in the United States in 1969. Although later reviews of those experimental data and evaluation of additional data led scientists to conclude that cyclamate does not cause cancer, it has not been reapproved in the United States (although it is approved in many other countries).
There are many other interesting articles on the Internet about the history of cyclamates and its continued ban in the U.S. if the subject is of interest to you.
Originally, sucralose was found through the development of a new insecticide compound. It was never meant to be consumed. However, it was later introduced as a “natural sugar substitute” to the masses, and people had no idea that the stuff was actually toxic.
Sucralose is a synthetic organochlorine
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
