No, an artificial sweetener won’t give you cancer and, yes, it really can help you slim

A top dietician on why you shouldn’t fall for the fake news about sugar substitutes

HAVE you ditched ‘full-fat’ cola? Is sugary tea a turn-off? You’re not alone. Following an onslaught of Government warnings, millions of Britons are giving up their favourite sugary treats in an effort to stay trim and healthy.

Thanks to the sugar tax – which makes manufacturers pay a levy on the high-sugar drinks they sell – we don’t even have to try, with many favourites reformulated into virtuous versions of their former selves. Non-diet fizzy drinks such as Sprite or Irn-Bru, for instance, have seen their sugar content slashed in half, yet one sip still sets your tastebuds alive with the familiar sweet sensation.

The secret lies with three words: low calorie sweeteners.

The additives remain controversial, with ingredients such as aspartame (found in Diet Coke) blamed for cancer, diabetes and, despite being calorie-free, weight gain. So should we be concerned? As part of this newspaper’s campaign to fight fake health news, I, an expert dietician made it my mission to examine the scientific evidence to reach a conclusion based on medical facts. I can confidently say that such claims are nonsense, with not enough evidence to back them up.

In fact, the most reliable evidence suggests that sweeteners can curb cravings, prevent weight gain and keep you trimmer for longer. Here, I look at five of the most common sweeteners, debunk the myths and reveal why they may be Britain’s best-kept diet secret…

1. ASPARTAME WHAT IS IT?

First approved by the American health watchdog the FDA 40 years ago, this caloriefree powder contains amino acids that are 200 times sweeter than sugar, extracted from eggs and milk. Aspartame is found in a host of products including powdered sweetener Canderel, Diet Coke and, at lesser quantities, in diet yogurts such as Muller Light.

THE CONTROVERSY: Some of the fake health news is rooted in a smidgen of fact, blown way out of proportion. Methanol, a breakdown product of aspartame, is toxic and can cause permanent blindness but only at extremely high levels..

More recently, questions have been raised about the effect of aspartame and other low-calorie sweeteners on both gut bacteria and blood sugar ‘spikes’ as a result of two Israeli studies in 2015 and 2018.

The balance of good and bad bacteria in the gut is important for a healthy immune system and the metabolism of food, while frequent ‘spikes’ in blood sugar are linked to heart disease and diabetes.

The researchers showed that giving mice high doses of aspartame increased their blood sugar levels, leading to sporadic spikes. Tests were repeated on adults, with similar effects. The scientists also analysed the gut bacteria of the mice before and after sweeteners were given and found that the balance was disrupted after the experiment.

The study concluded that aspartame disrupts the healthy balance of gut bacteria, speeding up the release of sugar in the blood after eating and leading to blood sugar spikes. THE VERDICT: While interesting, the results of the Israeli studies are difficult to apply to the wider population. Most of the conclusions are based on mice studies – and the human metabolism is vastly different to that of an animal 3,000 times smaller.

The only human study involved just seven participants, while other research on aspartame and the gut has used dosages far higher than people would consume.

The truth, according to research published in 2016 in the journal Nutrients, is that adults given drinks sweetened with aspartame for a number of weeks lose significant amounts of weight.

This study reported that simply replacing two teaspoons of sugar with aspartame sweetener in three cups of tea daily cut two days’ worth of calories each month.

Aspartame has in fact been independently evaluated more than any other artificial sweetener and is deemed safe in many countries.

A 2013 European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) report concluded that it did not damage genes, cause cancer, risk the health of unborn babies or cause multiple sclerosis.

2. ACESULFAME K

WHAT IS IT? This calorie-free powder, made from potassium salt, was discovered in 1967. About 200 times sweeter than sugar, it is blended with either aspartame or sucralose to form Canderel powdered sweetener and Tesco tablet sweeteners, and is added to fizzy drinks such as Pepsi, Irn-Bru and Sprite Zero.

THE CONTROVERSY: Fake health news about possible links between acesulfame K and cancer was sparked by two studies in the 1970s. Research involving rats suggested it could be responsible for promoting tumour growth and led to a warning by the US Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Then, Canadian studies suggested acesulfame K could cross the placenta and expose unborn babies via amniotic fluid.

Some campaigners linked this to research suggesting that exposure in the womb could influence taste preferences in adult life. Some scientists believe the brain becomes confused if a sweet taste is not accompanied by calories so, according to this theory, eating sweet-tasting, low-calorie food could prompt a desire to eat more. THE VERDICT: Studies linking sweet food preferences with exposure to acesulfame K in the womb are not representative of humans – they have almost exclusively been conducted on animals. A Canadian meta-analysis in 2014 called out the fake news, stating that such mice studies involved concentrations ‘substantially greater than typical human exposure’. In fact, the most recent human evidence, from Vrije University in Amsterdam, shows the opposite: those consuming a drink sweetened with acesulfame K before eating consumed fewer sugary foods and lost significant weight. Researchers attribute this to a phenomenon called sensory-specific satiety, which occurs when tastebuds are over-exposed to a particular taste, resulting in a reduced appetite for it. As for links with cancer, they have been conclusively dismissed by the FDA, and early studies discredited. In 2000, the European Scientific Committee on Food – the body that deems food safe to eat – ruled acesulfame K was not toxic at recommended daily levels of 9mg per kg of body weight. For the average person, one can of Pepsi contains five per cent of this recommendation.

3. SACCHARIN

WHAT IS IT? Best known in its clickable ‘tablet’ form, saccharin is 300 to 500 times sweeter than sugar and

is made by adding oxygen to a chemical called toluenesulf on ami de. You’ll find it in Sweet ex, Sweet ’N Low, Hermesetas and sugar-free jams and jellies.

THE CONTROVERSY:

Research from the 1970s was responsible for unfounded fears linking sweeteners with cancer: this time scientists at the University of Wisconsin found that rats given a daily dose of saccharin had a higher risk of developing bladder cancer than those that were not. This prompted the FDA to temporarily ban it from sale in 1977, but this was lifted two years later after scientists warned that animal study evidence could not justify it.

More recently, convincing evidence around saccharin and gut bacteria implies high levels of the sweetener may have a disruptive effect on bacterial balance and blood glucose levels. A small 2014 pilot study at Aston University found saccharin at the highest recommended intake – equivalent to 23 packets of Sweet ’N Low – had a negative effect on gut bacteria and raised blood glucose levels in human volunteers.

THE VERDICT: While a few studies suggest that saccharin and other sweeteners could raise blood sugar levels, these have been small-scale, with the Aston University research involving just seven volunteers.

Meanwhile, recent evidence suggests saccharin slows the release of sugar in the blood, prompting charity Diabetes UK and EFSA to state consumption can help diabetics manage their condition. The cancer concern has been exposed as fake news by several powerful bodies they state there is no evidence that saccharin causes cancer in humans. A study by University of Florida researchers in 2015 found saccharin may in fact help to destroy some aggressive liver and breast cancer tumours by deactivating a protein responsible for their growth. Today, saccharin is deemed safe in daily doses of 5mg per kg of body weight (340mg daily for the average Briton).

4. POLYOLS

WHAT ARE THEY? Naturally occurring in fruits such as prunes and pears, these include sorbitol, xylitol, maltitol and erythritol. They are found in sugar-free Polos and all sugar-free chewing gum.

THE CONTROVERSY: Consuming a large quantity of polyols at once can indeed cause digestive discomfort as they absorb water inside the bowel, loosening stools. They also feed bacteria in the gut, creating gas. This is especially pronounced in those with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS); less than two packets of sugar-free Polos can lead to diarrhoea and bloating.

THE VERDICT: Large quantities can produce digestive problems for sensitive individuals, but for many others, they can also increase the healthier bifidobacteria in the gut and reduce constipation, according to researchers at the University of Michigan reducing constipation. Another 2003 review, published in Nutrition Research Reviews, suggested that replacing sugar with polyols may prove useful in treating diabetes as they are absorbed slowly by the bloodstream. Whilst scaremongers say polyols worsen diabetes, EFSA says they can help it by reducing spikes in blood sugar.

5. SUCRALOSE

WHAT IS IT? Sucralose was first discovered by a Tate & Lyle scientist in 1976 who mixed sugar with chlorine by mistake. The process eliminated the calories, but made it taste 650 times sweeter. It’s found in Splenda and Canderel Yellow.

THE CONTROVERSY:

Whispers of fake health news appeared two years ago when researchers at Ramazzini Institute in Bologna, Italy, found that high daily doses of sucralose caused tumours in mice.

More recently, there have been concerns about links to obesity. In 2018, researchers at George Washington University found that sucralose increased the amount of fat squeezed into healthy cells of obese participants.

THE VERDICT: Although the George Washington University findings are interesting, they concerned just 18 individuals – all already obese. It is unknown as to whether the same would be seen in those of a healthy weight. The Ramazzini Institute report was panned last year by the EFSA, which said ‘the available data did not support the conclusions of the authors’, as humans were not involved. A 2016 review of available evidence published in Nutrition And Cancer concluded that sucralose had no cancer-causing effects.

MY VERDICT: It is clear the fake health news pushers have blown a small piece of poorly conducted research way out of proportion. More research is certainly needed into sucralose and other artificial sweeteners. Yet it’s also beyond dispute that reducing calories can lead to significant weight loss.

Simply swapping sugar for lowcalorie sweeteners could potentially lead to a weight loss of up to four pounds a month, according to studies.

So given that they’re safe, readily available and taste exactly the same as sugar, isn’t it time you made the switch?