Demi
Sat, Jun-14-08, 03:49
From The Telegraph
London, UK
14 June, 2008
Saccharin may not be so sweet
Are our bodies fooled by sugar substitutes? Fat chance, says Lucy Atkins
Those who gaily click sugar substitutes into their morning coffee, knock back diet drinks and choose artificially sweetened foods in the belief that this is the key to weight loss could be in for a shock. New research from the US suggests that the body might not be fooled by these sugar substitutes. Researchers believe that such substitutes as aspartame or saccharin could mess up our appetites, causing us to crave more food and to burn fewer calories. Could it be that real, high-calorie sugar is less villainous than its ersatz replacements?
Scientists at Purdue University in Indiana fed rats on yoghurt, some of which was sweetened with sugar, some with an artificial sweetener. The rodents were then allowed to eat as much food as they wanted. Those that had eaten artificially sweetened yogurt wolfed down more calories than those who ate sugary yogurt. The over-eating rats became fatter than their real sugar-eating compatriots.
The Purdue team say that their research could show that artificial sweeteners disrupt appetite responses, making us crave more calories than we need. When we taste something sweet our metabolisms expect a calorie-dense meal (in nature, sweet foods are usually high calorie). If the sweet food is calorie-free, our bodies get confused and we eat more to compensate for "missing" calories.
More worryingly, the researchers suggest that artificial sweeteners could disrupt our metabolisms. The body temperature of the rats that ate sugar revved up as they anticipated burning off the calories they had eaten. The saccharin-fed rats did not experience this body temperature, calorie-burning boost. Their metabolisms stayed sluggish, ready to store any more incoming calories.
The implications for the diet food and drinks industry could be pretty radical. Despite the modern love of low-calorie sweeteners, we are getting fatter. Could calorie-free products really be to blame?
"This research is interesting," says dietician Dr Toni Steer. "But it is a rat study and extrapolating to humans is nigh on impossible." What is more, she says, "There is vast evidence from human studies, that substituting artificially sweetened drinks for sugary ones can help people lose weight." Based on calories alone, she has a point. "You consume fewer calories if you replace sugary drinks with sugar-free ones, and so you may lose a bit of weight," explains Steer.
But Lisa Miles, a nutrition scientist at the British Nutrition Foundation, says that some "sugar free" or "diet" foods made with sugar substitutes may not be as slimming as they seem.
"If a food is reformulated so that artificial sweeteners replace sugar, then other changes might be made too, such as including more fat, which can increase calories." More research is needed before we can say for sure whether the results of the rat study is right for humans. The body's appetite control is complex. It is partly hormonal: eating triggers hormones which signal to the brain that you are becoming full. It is also partly mechanical: the stomach stretches, thereby telling you to put down your fork.
There are external cues (the tempting Häagen-Dazs booth at the cinema; the yummy Marks & Spencer adverts on TV) and there are emotional and psychological ones too. How sugar substitutes affect these things nobody knows.
One thing is certain: if you want to lose weight, high-calorie sugar is not the way to do it. The message is: burn off as many calories as you consume and you won't be fat. Simple, but effective, even for rats.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/main.jhtml?xml=/health/2008/06/14/hsweeteners14.xml
London, UK
14 June, 2008
Saccharin may not be so sweet
Are our bodies fooled by sugar substitutes? Fat chance, says Lucy Atkins
Those who gaily click sugar substitutes into their morning coffee, knock back diet drinks and choose artificially sweetened foods in the belief that this is the key to weight loss could be in for a shock. New research from the US suggests that the body might not be fooled by these sugar substitutes. Researchers believe that such substitutes as aspartame or saccharin could mess up our appetites, causing us to crave more food and to burn fewer calories. Could it be that real, high-calorie sugar is less villainous than its ersatz replacements?
Scientists at Purdue University in Indiana fed rats on yoghurt, some of which was sweetened with sugar, some with an artificial sweetener. The rodents were then allowed to eat as much food as they wanted. Those that had eaten artificially sweetened yogurt wolfed down more calories than those who ate sugary yogurt. The over-eating rats became fatter than their real sugar-eating compatriots.
The Purdue team say that their research could show that artificial sweeteners disrupt appetite responses, making us crave more calories than we need. When we taste something sweet our metabolisms expect a calorie-dense meal (in nature, sweet foods are usually high calorie). If the sweet food is calorie-free, our bodies get confused and we eat more to compensate for "missing" calories.
More worryingly, the researchers suggest that artificial sweeteners could disrupt our metabolisms. The body temperature of the rats that ate sugar revved up as they anticipated burning off the calories they had eaten. The saccharin-fed rats did not experience this body temperature, calorie-burning boost. Their metabolisms stayed sluggish, ready to store any more incoming calories.
The implications for the diet food and drinks industry could be pretty radical. Despite the modern love of low-calorie sweeteners, we are getting fatter. Could calorie-free products really be to blame?
"This research is interesting," says dietician Dr Toni Steer. "But it is a rat study and extrapolating to humans is nigh on impossible." What is more, she says, "There is vast evidence from human studies, that substituting artificially sweetened drinks for sugary ones can help people lose weight." Based on calories alone, she has a point. "You consume fewer calories if you replace sugary drinks with sugar-free ones, and so you may lose a bit of weight," explains Steer.
But Lisa Miles, a nutrition scientist at the British Nutrition Foundation, says that some "sugar free" or "diet" foods made with sugar substitutes may not be as slimming as they seem.
"If a food is reformulated so that artificial sweeteners replace sugar, then other changes might be made too, such as including more fat, which can increase calories." More research is needed before we can say for sure whether the results of the rat study is right for humans. The body's appetite control is complex. It is partly hormonal: eating triggers hormones which signal to the brain that you are becoming full. It is also partly mechanical: the stomach stretches, thereby telling you to put down your fork.
There are external cues (the tempting Häagen-Dazs booth at the cinema; the yummy Marks & Spencer adverts on TV) and there are emotional and psychological ones too. How sugar substitutes affect these things nobody knows.
One thing is certain: if you want to lose weight, high-calorie sugar is not the way to do it. The message is: burn off as many calories as you consume and you won't be fat. Simple, but effective, even for rats.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/main.jhtml?xml=/health/2008/06/14/hsweeteners14.xml