 |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
July 9th, 2012
05:36 PM ET
Artificial sweeteners no silver bullet for losing weightYou've got a sugar craving but don't want to put on more pounds, so you turn to alternative sweeteners. Is that a good move? A joint scientific statement from the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association reveals that while non-nutritive sweeteners can be useful for limiting carbohydrates and limiting added sugars in the diet, the existing scientific evidence is inconclusive about whether this strategy works well in the long run for cutting calories, reducing dietary sugar and losing weight. The non-nutritive sweeteners in the analysis include both artificial sweeteners and stevia, which is marketed as a natural sweetener. Because the study was not looking at the safety of sweeteners, they chose products that were regarded as generally safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The products include aspartame (Equal, NutraSweet), acesulfame-K (Sweet One), saccharin (Sweet ‘N Low), sucralose (Splenda), Neotame, and stevia (Truvia, PureVia, Sweet Leaf). While the AHA position on limiting added sugars in the diet was important, “the logical question was “how?”, said lead scientific statement author Christopher Gardner of Stanford University. He explained that his group was tasked with analyzing the available data on non-nutritive sweeteners in the diet and their role in cutting calories and added sugar. “Smart use of non-nutritive sweeteners can be a tool for consumers, reducing calories, added sugars in the diet, and helping consumers maintain or reach a healthy weight that fights the risk factors for heart disease and diabetes,” but Gardner added that determining the benefits of non-nutritive sweeteners is a complex issue. For example, “if you choose a beverage sweetened with non-nutritive sweetener, replacing the 150 calories of a sugar sweetened drink, and then indulge in a 300 calorie cookie later in the day, you’re going to end up eating more calories than you subtracted.” For consumers, Gardiner says there are three important points to take away from the scientific statement: 1. Compensation is the big issue: When people eliminate added sugars by choosing a beverage or food with non-nutritive sweeteners, the key to losing or maintaining weight is to not overcompensate by indulging in other foods that are high in calories. Non-nutritive sweeteners won’t benefit consumers who later compensate by eating other high calorie snacks. 2. Non-nutritive beverage and food products are different: Gardiner says that people don’t compensate the same way for non-nutritive beverages as they do with food containing non-nutritive sweeteners. “Here is the twist - when people eat foods with non-nutritive sweeteners, people tend to compensate more by eating more calories… it seems to be physiological,” he explained. 3. Non-nutritive sweeteners are a tool for eating fewer carbohydrates and added sugars, but it's important for consumers to keep an eye on the big picture. Gardiner notes that one of the best ways for limiting added sugar in the diet is to follow the American Heart Association’s dietary guidelines, which include
Next entry »Less sitting may lead to longer life
« Previous entryOverheard: Ban on gay men donating blood
|
  About this blog
Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love. Recent Comments
 |
||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertise with us | About us | Help | Advertising Practices
This was an great story thanks for sharing this information
When you go behind politics we see that type 2 diabetes has already been reversed. Dr Liu in Denmark revealed how to reverse diabetes without any medications. No one needs a drug to reverse type 2 diabetes.
All of this information was taken from the Spirit Happy Diet people in Denmark. Diabetes has been reversed in over 10,000 people by using a specialized diabetes diet. The diet also reversed body fat in people trying to lose weight. Scientists showed food chemicals is the cause of almost all diabetes.
They also showed how to reverse your own diabetes without medications.
just google SPIRIT HAPPY DIET
Anna,
I reversed type II by eating the right foods! My AiC and triglycerides fell to within normal ranges within 3 months of eating correctly. And that did NOT include artificial sweeteners! Another benefit was my high bolld pressure returned to normal ranges and serum cholesterol is in control.
Well Artificial sweeteners will always get a bad rap because people make up facts all the time Anna cite your facts what study show that sweetener chemicals cause type 2 diabetes. Insulin resistance, over eating, genetics, bad diet all contribute.
I have heard studies like this repeated ad infinitum. How can they call this science? The problem is not the artificial sweetener. As advertised, instead of 100 calories, the product has 0 calories. The problem is that people have no discipline to stop eating. Don't blame the non-nutritive sweetener.
Actually, there is AMPLE evidence through clinical study that shows artificial sweeteners CAUSE weight gain indirectly. Most artificial sweeteners trigger insulin response. This causes your body to look for the sugars to use the added insulin. Usually, you will get a craving for carbs or sweets to fill that craving. It all goes on int he background so you don't realize what is heppening. Real stevia doesn't trigger the insulin response. The response to extracted ribiana from stevia is not as well studied.
Sweeteners do not trigger an insulin response its a myth its only a perceived increase, because i see no cited study in this forum at all just know it all want a be dieticians. Who probably think vaccines cause Autism too.
Only in the Western world would academic people actually factor in the logic of 'If a diet coke saves 200kcals then I can eat a pastry and this might actually gain calories'
Here's the findings from my own study from ten minutes of my logic.
"if you consume calories, your body will use a high percentage of them calories and if you use a sweeter in moderation its probably better than high calorie alternatives"
What is wrong with us?, years after the apollo missions we can't understand this?
I'll have a double meat cheeseburger with a large order of fries and a diet soda. We continue to search for a way to have our cake and eat it too. We want it all without the effort or perceived deprivation. It's the new American way; we want it all and we want it right now. The truth is we can have real sweets, only in moderation. Does anyone remember the day when juice was served at breakfast in a 6 ounce glass? Now, we give it to kids all day long because it's convenient to hand them those little cartons as opposed to pouring some milk or perhaps preparing a glass of water. We just don't want to work too hard for anything. Eating and drinking real food takes work.
better than a double meat cheeseburger, large fries and regular coke. I get what your aying, but a person who eats that is gonna eat that regardless, so whats wrong with saving some cals on that monster meal by getting diet. This whole article is just dumb to me.Dont try and discredit non-nutritive sweeteners by saying well if you eat more later then it doesnt matter, well it would be worse if it was a regular coke right? Do they think just cause someone has a reg coke that later they wont have that same crappy meal?
Lou, the difference is the vastly greater damage being done to your body by the artificial sweeteners!
I'd rather have a nutella sandwich + diet pepsi than buttered toast + regular coke... Pick your poison, consume in moderation.
This article is not very well written. Also the information is nothing new. Artificial sweeteners are not the only answer, but it is better to have a diet coke with no sugar than a regular coke that is 100% sugar.
Thats like saying it is better to die in a car crash than die in a fire. BOTH of them can do serious harm to your body.
I was directed to your blog by Megan's Aunt Debbie. I have been up and down up to 110 lbs serveal times. I finally joined Food Addicts in Recovery Anon. and learned about sugar and white flour addiction. While eating properly my weight quickly drops (average 10lbs a mos) to where it belongs. I still struggle with the addiction and I know that one wrong bite starts the cycle and I am right back up again. What is remarkable to me however, is unlike other diets I have tried, I have been able to get back on the wagon with eating this way. Usually, once I break a diet's rules I cannot again achieve even the same small success I had with it the first try. With this, while I may be a grumpy shrew for the first week or so, after that it is a smooth ride. I know that it regulates my blood sugar. My energy level goes up, my skin gets nicer, and my over all health improves. The best part is that while it takes putting a bit more focus on planning and preparing meals, you can eat like this anywhere as it is so simple. I have never had a restaurant unable to easily accomodate my needs. The hardest part is remembering why you want and need to eat this way when you are slim and feeling great. I am very happy fo have found your site. AND ALWAYS READ THE LABELS they do try to sneak in sugar everywhere!
Super toxic stuff. Drink at your own risk.
I am more concerned about long-term effects of these fake sugars. Maybe using them sparingly will help keep diabetes at bay for awhile, but if a diabetes drug itself can cancer (http://www.newsinferno.com/pharmaceuticals/canadian-study-finds-actos-raises-bladder-cancer-risk-by-22-percent/39230) then how much safer can an artificial sweetner be?
There is AMPLE evidence that artificial sweeteners do far more harm to you than sugar! But you won't hear that from the pharma companies that make them!
I just tried these for the first time yesterday. I bohugt them at my corner Walgreens. I LOVE THEM! YUM! I was wondering why I didnt think of this! It's like my two favorite things together,golden raisins and lemon! Oh yes and I am a 47 year old woman!!!
After having seen a ton of these studies, I'm starting to think that what really matters is that when we eat non-nutritive sweeteners, our tongues taste SWEET. Our brains sense sweet. And our bodies put out insulin ("store fat NOW!!"), because we're eating something sweet. So, no extra cookies may be needed. Sweet is sweet–and calories don't matter. What matters for weight gain is whether or not you're triggering insulin production...
L, you make a good point about the physiological response (insulin production) to consuming something "sweet" (quotations used to indicate artificial sweetening); however, the studies done to prove this yield very mixed results - some say certain artificial sweeteners can trigger an insulin response, others will not. I would assume if an insulin response was produced via consumption of artificial sweeteners, and there is no glucose consumed (or other sugars), blood glucose would decrease drastically as any levels would be sequestered by the insulin to fat and muscle cells. The effects of low blood glucose could create a sugar craving to replenish your energy supply.
I see no harm in consuming an artificial sweetened beverage (like a coke) so long as you are aware how much you have eaten/when/will it trigger you to crave something else. I have been using Splenda in my coffee (with a splash of skim milk) that I drink alongside my breakfast to cut down on the sugar I would have regularly added. I avoid carbonated beverages, but when I do enjoy them I see no point to consume extra calories and often opt for diet or low-cal versions.
I have not experienced adverse side effects, but I know several people who cannot consume specific ones unless they want headaches/diarrhea/upset stomaches/etc.
There is one difference between the non-sugar sweeteners. Stevia is shown not to cause the insulin effect. The sweet response is as much chemical as it is psychological. The sweet from stevia seems to provide some kind of satisfaction absent from theother artificials.
Hurrah!... Finally in the mainstream media. People! Stop fooling yourself by believes in any kind of EASY CURE myths like "silver bullets" and "magic pills" altogether. Hard work and careful DIET AVOIDING freaking chemical FOOD ADDITIVES is the real but not quick solution to many problems including OBESITY. Take a look into the DyeDiet: Eat Food, Not Food Additives! Long term health effects of the Artificial Sweeteners are UNKNOWN. We are the nation exposed to the "Dye Diet". Even worse: We are the Nation that is the victim of "DOMESTIC FOOD TERRORISM". Please go to Dye Diet educational (non-profit) website to see how to escape being the damn victim. Stop the "dye diet"!
The long term health effects of artificial food additives are WELL KNOWN but will not be widely reported until the main stream media gets out of bed with the big pharma suppliers of these poisons.
Hi,
Thank you for your great information about this topics. A very new unique method to deliver raspberry ketones to the body inside a chewable chocolate wafer called Razzbites. A new weight loss product producing massive and fast weight loss without
taking another pill.
For more infomrmation please visit :
http://www.razzbites.com
Phone Number:
(813) 642-7299
Yeah this is stupid.
I am on a low-calorie diet and I drink lots of diet coke. GUESS WHAT, FOLKS?
I don't compensate later on by consuming calories because of... GASP.. Self control!!
what a novel idea! So diet coke does not make me fat, it SAVES me calories and makes me THIN!
Imagine that!
Excellent topic
I don’t have sugar craving because I am diabetic. I use sweeteners that are good for people like me.
-Emily Dunn