Connect with us

Published

1 year ago

on

By Deliana Infante Reviewed by Lily Ramsey, LLM

The sweet debate
Exploring artificial options
Nature's sweetness
Sweetener safety and health
Beyond taste and health
Sweet decisions
References 
Further reading

Artificial and natural sweeteners are popular sugar substitutes. While artificial sweeteners promise zero calories, their health effects are controversial.

Natural sweeteners, such as honey and stevia, offer a healthier alternative but still require moderation. Ultimately, making informed dietary choices about sugar substitutes is critical to overall health and wellness.

Image Credit: Pheelings media/Shutterstock.com The sweet debate

Artificial sweeteners are chemically synthesized sugar substitutes designed to provide the sweetness of sugar without the calories and potential blood sugar spikes.1 Common examples include aspartame, sucralose, and saccharin, which are often found in "diet" or "zero-calorie" beverages and low-sugar processed foods.1

Natural alternatives, on the other hand, are sweeteners derived from natural sources, such as plants or fruits. They include stevia, honey, agave nectar, and more.1,2 Although these sweeteners contain calories, they often have a lower glycemic index than regular sugar, meaning they're less likely to spike blood sugar levels.1,2

The prevalence of these molecules in the modern diet is hard to ignore. Fueled by a global push toward healthier eating and weight management, their use has skyrocketed; the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) alone has approved six artificial sweeteners and designated several natural alternatives as "generally recognized as safe" (GRAS).3

In addition to providing a lower-calorie alternative to sugar, these sweeteners allow people with diabetes to enjoy sweet-tasting foods without disturbing their blood sugar levels.3 However, the health implications are still a topic of much debate, underscoring the need to make informed dietary choices. Exploring artificial options

Six artificial sugar substitutes have been approved by the FDA:

Saccharin (Sweet and Low, Sweet Twin, Sweet'N Low, and Necta Sweet), aspartame (Nutrasweet, Equal, and Sugar Twin), acesulfame potassium (Sunett and Sweet One), sucralose (Splenda), neotame (Newtame), and advantame (Advantame).3

They typically have a more complex chemical structure than regular sugar, as they are synthetically-made compounds that contain nitrogen, chlorine, and sulfur elements. The most common are aspartame and sucralose.1

Aspartame is known for its intense sweetness and low-calorie profile. It is made up of aspartic acid and phenylalanine.4 When metabolized, it breaks down into these amino acids and a small amount of methanol. Although it is up to 200 times sweeter than sugar, it provides zero calories.4

Sucralose is another high-intensity artificial sweetener that is about 600 times sweeter than sugar.1,4 It is chemically produced by sucrose chlorination. Sucralose remains stable under heat and over a wide range of pH conditions. That's why it's ideal for use in cooking or processed foods.1,4 These sweeteners underwent a rigorous approval process before they came to market.5

The FDA5 and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)6 take strict measures to ensure the safety of artificial sweeteners entering the market.5,6 The approval process begins when a manufacturer submits a detailed application for food ingredient approval, including scientific research and evidence to support the product's safety. 5,6

The agencies then review the evidence and compare the cumulative dietary exposure estimate with toxicological information on the sweeteners. 5,6 If the substance meets the standards, it is approved.  However, its safety continues to be monitored. 5,6

It's also important to remember that each sweetener has an Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI), an estimate of the amount of a substance a person can consume daily over a lifetime without health risks.4-6 Often, these limits far exceed the amounts people consume. 4-6 Difference Between Artificial Sweeteners And Real Sugar Play Nature's sweetness

In addition to their enhanced sweetness, natural sweeteners have a unique and rich nutritional profile.  Stevia, for example, is a zero-calorie sweetener derived from the leaves of Stevia rebaudiana, but its high-intensity sweetness doesn't affect blood sugar levels.4 Another example is Siraitia grosvenorii Swingle fruit extract, commonly known as monk fruit/luo han guo.4

Then there's thaumatin, a natural sweetener derived from the fruit of the West African katemfe fruit.4 It's estimated to be 2000 times sweeter than sugar but has a different flavor profile that includes lingering sweetness and delayed onset.4

In the case of honey and maple syrup, these two natural sweeteners are composed primarily of fructose and glucose and have a moderate effect on blood sugar levels, but have interesting antioxidant and antibacterial properties.7,8 Sweetener safety and health

Scientific evidence shows that the health effects of artificial sweeteners vary. Aspartame, for example, is metabolized to methanol, which at high levels can lead to toxic health effects and has been linked to the development of cancer.4,9 On the other hand, sucralose (Splenda) has been associated with gut permeability and changes in the microbiota, negative modulation of T-cell responses, inflammation, oxidative stress, and genotoxicity.9-11

The WHO's risk assessment of aspartame concluded that there was limited evidence to change the ADI previously established.12 In the case of sucralose and the rest of the sweeteners (natural and synthetic), the WHO recommended against their consumption for weight loss unless the individual suffers from pre-existing diabetes.13 Beyond taste and health

It is important to note that dietary choices about sweeteners can have an impact beyond health. The production of artificial sweeteners often involves complex, energy-intensive industrial processes that contribute to a larger carbon footprint.

They have also recently raised public concern for their potential negative impact on aquatic life, as they are resistant to wastewater treatment and remain as a new source of pollution in water bodies.14

On the other hand, natural sweeteners, such as honey, may have their own environmental and ethical implications, particularly concerning the welfare of bees. However, this calls for attention to the growing trend of sustainable and ethically sourced sweeteners.15 Locally produced honey, organic stevia, and maple syrup, for example, have less environmental impact and often support community economies and fair trade practices.15 Sweet decisions

When choosing between artificial sweeteners and natural alternatives, health goals and dietary needs must be considered. Artificial sweeteners are low in calories and may aid in weight management for individuals with certain health conditions or diseases such as diabetes, while natural sweeteners such as honey or maple syrup have different nutritional profiles and biological activities.

For diabetes management, artificial sweeteners may be preferred due to their minimal impact on blood glucose, while natural sweeteners should be used with caution. Moderation is key, as excessive consumption of either type can interfere with weight management and glycemic control. References Chattopadhyay S, et al.(2011). Artificial Sweeteners – a review. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 51(4), 611–621. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0571-1 Commissioner, O. of the. (n.d.). How sweet it is: All about sweeteners. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Online]  https://www.fda.gov/consumers/consumer-updates/how-sweet-it-all-about-sweeteners Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. (n.d.-b). High-intensity sweeteners. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Online]  https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/high-intensity-sweeteners Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. (n.d.-a). Aspartame and other sweeteners in food. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.  [Online] https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-petitions/aspartame-and-other-sweeteners-food Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. (n.d.-c). Understanding how FDA regulates food additives and Gras ingredients. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. [Online]  https://www.fda.gov/food/food-additives-and-gras-ingredients-information-consumers/understanding-how-fda-regulates-food-additives-and-gras-ingredients Food Additives. European Food Safety Authority. (n.d.). [Online]  https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/topics/topic/food-additives Samarghandian S, et al. (2017). Honey and Health: A Review of Recent Clinical Research. Pharmacognosy Res. 9(2):121-127. doi: 10.4103/0974-8490.204647. PMID: 28539734; PMCID: PMC5424551. Mohammed F, et al.(2023). Nutritional, pharmacological, and sensory properties of Maple Syrup: A comprehensive review. Heliyon, 9(9). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19216 Artificial Sweeteners and cancer. National Cancer Institute. (n.d.). [Online]  https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/artificial-sweeteners-fact-sheet#:~:text=Six%20artificial%20sweeteners%20are%20approved,sucralose%2C%20neotame%2C%20and%20advantame. Schiffman S.S, et al. (2023). Toxicological and pharmacokinetic properties of sucralose-6-acetate and its parent sucralose: in vitro screening assays. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B, 26(6), 307–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937404.2023.2213903 Zani F, et al. (2023). The dietary sweetener sucralose is a negative modulator of T cell-mediated responses. Nature, 615(7953), 705–711. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-05801-6 World Health Organization. (n.d.-a). Aspartame hazard and risk assessment results released. World Health Organization. [Online] https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released World Health Organization. (n.d.-b). Who advises not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control in newly released guideline. World Health Organization. [Online]  https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-use-non-sugar-sweeteners-for-weight-control-in-newly-released-guideline Naik A.Q, et al. (2021). Environmental impact of the presence, distribution, and use of artificial sweeteners as emerging sources of pollution. Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2021, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6624569 Choudhury, N. R. (2023, August 17). Are naturally derived sweeteners more sustainable?. Food Beverage Insider. [Online]  https://www.foodbeverageinsider.com/sweeteners/naturally-derived-sweeteners-sustainability-and-eco-friendliness Further reading What are the Effects of Artificial Sweeteners on Gut Health? Sucralose: Safety and Evidence Are Sweeteners Healthy?

Last Updated: Feb 16, 2024

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Sports

Cincinnati freshman lineman dies; no cause given

Published

2 hours ago

on

April 22, 2025

By

Cincinnati freshman lineman dies; no cause given

  • Adam RittenbergApr 22, 2025, 12:35 PM ET

    Close

      College football reporter; joined ESPN in 2008. Graduate of Northwestern University.

Cincinnati freshman football player Jeremiah Kelly, an early enrollee who went through spring practice with the team, died unexpectedly Tuesday morning at his residence.

The school didn’t disclose a cause of death.

Kelly, an 18-year-old offensive lineman from Avon, Ohio, helped his high school team to a 16-0 record and a state championship last fall.

“The Bearcats football family is heartbroken by the sudden loss of this outstanding young man,” Cincinnati coach Scott Satterfield said in a statement. “In the short time Jeremiah has spent with our team, he has made a real impact, both on the field and in our locker room. My prayers are with the Kelly family and those who had the pleasure of knowing Jeremiah.”

Cincinnati completed its spring practice session last week.

“We’ve suffered a heartbreaking loss today,” Cincinnati athletic director John Cunningham said in a statement. “All of us at UC send our love and prayers to the Kelly family and we will do everything that we can to support them and our Bearcats student-athletes in the difficult days and weeks ahead.”

Continue Reading

Sports

UCLA’s Foster goes with ‘gut’ in getting Iamaleava

Published

2 hours ago

on

April 22, 2025

By

UCLA's Foster goes with 'gut' in getting Iamaleava

LOS ANGELES — UCLA coach DeShaun Foster said Tuesday that the Bruins just couldn’t pass up the opportunity to get “the No. 1 player in the portal” in former Tennessee quarterback Nico Iamaleava.

In his first comments since Iamaleava’s tumultuous transfer was announced Sunday, Foster said he and the rest of his staff were able to sift through the noise surrounding Iamaleava’s exit from Tennessee, which included reports of increased financial demands from his representation and missed practices.

“You just have to go with your gut and with the people that you trust,” Foster said. “You can’t just read everything on social media and come to a conclusion from that. You have to do a little bit more homework. So I think we did a good job in vetting and figuring out what we wanted to do, and we were able to execute and now we’re here.”

Iamaleava, a five-star prospect from Long Beach, California, was recruited by UCLA out of high school. He entered the portal last Wednesday, and Foster said the familiarity between the two parties helped facilitate the process.

“If it wasn’t a local kid, it would’ve been a little bit more difficult,” Foster said. “But being able to see him play in high school and evaluating that film at Tennessee wasn’t hard to do. A lot of the kids on the team know him and have played with him.”

Foster said Iamaleava won’t be able to join the Bruins until this summer.

Iamaleava was earning $2.4 million with the Vols under the contract he signed with Spyre Sports Group, the Tennessee-based collective, when he was still in high school. The deal would have paid him in the $10 million range altogether had he stayed four years at Tennessee.

Sources told ESPN’s Chris Low that Iamaleava’s representatives wanted a deal in the $4 million range for him to stay at Tennessee for a third season.

When asked to characterize Iamaleava’s NIL deal with UCLA, Foster simply called it “successful” and added that he did not think money played a role in any player staying or going.

“I don’t know what he was looking for or whatnot,” Foster said of Iamaleava’s NIL package. “I know that he accepted our contract and he wants to be a Bruin, so that’s all I’m focused on. He wants to be here, and we’re excited.”

Foster said that once the commitment was secured, he informed quarterback Joey Aguilar, who had transferred to Westwood from App State and was seemingly in line to take over as the Bruins’ starting quarterback this season. According to Foster, Aguilar’s NIL package was not needed to fulfill Iamaleava’s own deal, and he provided Aguilar with the opportunity to stay and compete for the starting job.

Aguilar entered the transfer portal Monday and, according to ESPN sources, is set to transfer to Tennessee.

“When I was in the NFL, they drafted a running back every year,” Foster said. “Every year I was [at UCLA] as a running back, they recruited more running backs to come here. So, this is a competition sport for coaches, players, everybody.”

As college football begins to more resemble the NFL model, Foster said he expects multiyear deals between players and programs to become an eventual reality. For now, he credited the program’s main collective “Bruins for Life” for allowing UCLA to be in conversations with players they could not be in before.

“I haven’t lost anybody this portal to money. We’ve been able to actually offer people the same amount or even more than what other people have offered them,” Foster said. “You want to be in conversations, you want to play big-time ball, you want to have haters, you want all of this stuff because that means that you’re trending in the right direction.”

UCLA is coming off a 5-7 season in which its offense struggled. The Bruins finished 14th in scoring offense and 12th in total offense in Big Ten play. At Tennessee, Iamaleava threw for 2,619 yards and 19 touchdowns last season and helped lead the Volunteers to a spot in the College Football Playoff.

“This is a good buzz for us,” Foster said. “Keeping the local kids here — a big-time recruit — letting them know that you don’t have to go to certain conferences to be successful and make it to the NFL. You can do it right here in California.”

Continue Reading

Technology

Tesla short sellers have made $11.5 billion from this year’s selloff

Published

2 hours ago

on

April 22, 2025

By

Tesla short sellers have made .5 billion from this year's selloff

It’s been a brutal year for Tesla shareholders so far, and a hugely profitable one for short sellers, who bet on a decline in the company’s stock price.

Tesla shorts have generated $11.5 billion in mark-to-market profits in 2025, according to data from S3 Partners. The data reflected Monday’s closing price of $227.50, at which point Tesla shares were down 44% for the year.

The stock rallied about 4% on Tuesday, along with gains in the broader market, heading into Tesla’s first-quarter earnings report after the close of trading. Tesla didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The electric vehicle maker is expected to report a slight decline in year-over-year revenue weeks after announcing a 13% drop in vehicle deliveries for the quarter. With CEO Elon Musk playing a central role in President Donald Trump’s administration, responsible for dramatically cutting the size and capacity of the federal government, Tesla has faced widespread protests in the U.S. and Europe, where Musk has actively supported Germany’s far-right AfD party.

Tesla shares plummeted 36% in the first quarter, their worst performance for any period since 2022, and have continued to drop in April, largely on concerns that President Trump’s sweeping tariffs on top trade partners will increase the cost of parts and materials crucial for EV production, including manufacturing equipment, automotive glass, printed circuit boards and battery cells.

The company is also struggling to keep pace with lower-cost competitors in China, and is a laggard in the robotaxi market, which is currently dominated in the U.S. by Alphabet’s Waymo. Tesla has promised to launch its first driverless ride-hailing offering in Austin, Texas, in June.

Tesla has been the biggest stock decliner among tech megacaps this year, followed by Nvidia, which was down about 28% as of Monday’s close. The chipmaker has been the second-best profit generator for short sellers, generating returns of $9.4 billion, according to S3.

Nvidia is currently the most-shorted stock in terms of value, with $24.6 billion worth sold short, S3 said. Apple is second at $22.2 billion, and Tesla is third at $17.6 billion.

Musk has a long and antagonistic history with short sellers, who have made plenty of money at times during Tesla’s 15 years on the stock market, but have also been burned badly for extended stretches.

In 2020, Tesla publicly mocked short sellers, promoting red satin shorts for sale.

“Limited edition shorts now available at Tesla.com/shortshorts” Musk wrote in a social media post in July of that year, as the stock was in the midst of a steep rally.

Two years earlier, hedge fund manager David Einhorn of Greenlight Capital posted a tweet that he received the pairs of short shorts that Musk had promised him.

“I want to thank @elonmusk for the shorts. He is a man of his word!” Einhorn wrote. Einhorn had previously disclosed that his firm’s bet against Tesla “was our second biggest loser” in the most recent quarter.

In February 2022, after reports surfaced that the Department of Justice was investigating two investors who had shorted Tesla’s stock, Musk told CNBC that he was “greatly encouraged” by the action and said “hedge funds have used short selling and complex derivatives to take advantage of small investors.”

PlainSite founder Aaron Greenspan, a former Tesla short seller and outspoken critic of Musk, sued the Tesla CEO alleging he engaged in stock price manipulation for years through a variety of schemes.

The case was removed to federal court last year. In 2023, Musk’s social network X banned Greenspan and PlainSite, which publishes legal and other public and company records, from the platform.

— CNBC’s Tom Rotunno contributed to this report.

WATCH: Here’s what to watch for in Tesla’s earnings report

Continue Reading

Trending