https://www.newscientist.com/articl...ks-and-strokes/

Crikey!

Mind you, I do think that this might be a level of risk that is different according to how a person eats.

I just came across a similar article this morning.



I don't like how they equate all artificial sweeteners with the problems associated with the effects of 2 artificial sweeteners that are sugar alcohols.

Not that they shouldn't be investigating any problems associated with other artificial sweeteners (would have been nice if they'd done that before putting them on the market), but that's a rather broad brushstroke to take... especially only being concerned about their effects on cardiovascular risks.

There's so many digestive issues associated with some other sugar alcohols - some of which are found in practically every sugar-free candy and gum on the market.

Even the sugar free candies that proudly emblazon "made with Splenda" or "made with stevia" on the front of the package - when you read the list of ingredients on the back, that's only one of the sweeteners in it. Almost all of them have Maltitol, Sorbitol or some other sugar alcohols in them.

I quit ingesting xylitol immediately when I realized it made me pass gas a lot. (I didn't want to be an old fart)

I do use it in my toothpaste.

When I see studies like this, these things come to mid:

1) Who is financing the study? Big sugar?

2) How big of a risk are we talking about? A 1% risk? A 99% risk? Or where in between?

3) Is the sugar substate more dangerous than sugar? As we all should know, sugar makes your body release insulin, which has been called "The killer hormone".

4) Is using it in moderation OK.

I haven't investigated these questions, but I would if I put xylitol into my stomach.

Me? I drink mostly water with added minerals. Other than that, coffee, tea, and three 4oz glasses of wine per week. Anything else is rare.

Water, coffee, tea, and moderate amounts of wine seem to have passed the test of time.

I sweeten the coffee and tea with Kal brand Stevia because it has no other ingredients, and doesn't have that weird aftertaste that some stevia products do. Sometimes a bit of spenda too.

So far, so good. I'm about to turn 78, I rarely get sick (one mild cold every 15 years or so), my doc sent me to a heard doc to do all the tests, and he said I have a heart and circulatory system of a healthy upper 40 or 50-year-old.

Tests should be conducted further on sweeteners, as we know little and there are market forces that would like to steer people to their products. The current darling of the sweeteners is Allulose. Many are heralding Allulose as it doesn't affect BG or insulin and purportedly has GLP-1 agonist effects when consumed. The issue is who will foot the bill for good studies with no conflicts of interest, as these food products usually only get tested when the manufacturers fund them, an immediate CoI. While allulose is found naturally in fruits including jackfruit, figs and raisins, it's being marketed in powder or granules after being manufactured from fructose of these fruits. We know that consuming something manufactured as concentrated from a bag does not always undergo the same reactions when metabolized, but many low carb people are touting its benefits. Not craving anything sweet, I'll continue be a spectator on this topic, as it's very difficult to duplicate healthy properties found in nature when converting something to be sold concentrated in a bag. The question I always consider before adjusting my food consumption is "is it essential to my health?" Probably a good way to go for these products.

Which is how I approach it too. I can find no good reason to consume artificial sweeteners and in fact tend to believe that they are probably all not only not beneficial but are probably down right detrimental. By totally eliminating both natural and artificial sweeteners I have been able to reduce my cravings for something sweet down to almost zero.

To be honest, I'm not surprised to learn about these negative health effects in humans. It's been known for many years that xylitol is highly toxic for dogs, causing seizures and liver failure .

Xylitol is beneficial for fighting oral bacteria, so can be found in some toothpastes and mouthwashes .. but those products aren't being consumed. That being said, if it effectively kills oral bacteria, what does it do to our gut microbiome, the "good guys"?

And this is supposed to be a good thing? When it's not, you know, FOOD?

And the search for "free dessert" continues...

Question.

How good is the study?

I think this would hinge on how quickly the substance clears the body. If people daily use it to sweeten coffee, that's different from baking something "treaty" for our birthday.

Dose could make the poison when it comes to these things that "trick" the body. The body still reacts like we ate something sweet. Only now, the body is not finding what it expects in the way of fuel and nutrients.

Does it go nuts like we do when we lose our car keys? Does it compensate in other ways that do us harm?

We don't know. But it doesn't seem like that good an idea.

Personally, I discovered I mostly digested sugar alcohols. Which meant that, for me, they weren't that low carb after all.

Dr Casey Means in the book, Good Energy separates them into two groups. 1 Artificial sweeteners, aspartame, Sucralose and saccharin leads to higher weight, microbiome disturbance, cause insulin release…Avoid Completely.
2."Natural sweeteners"..allulose, Monkfruit, stevia and sugar alcohols like Erythritol can still trigger reward pathways and trigger GI symptoms. Use sparingly, wean to none over time! [it’s been 14 years…I’m taking my time ]

This process is how I moved away from sweetness, except for some Sucralose use when it was considered "the best." I weaned to zero and started tasting the sugar in lemon juice My smoothies have 1/2 cup or more of lemon or lime juice.

But going carnivore for most of 2019, strict at the beginning, then adding fish and dairy and the like, put me in remission from a severe flare. I got in trouble during mid-2020 when anxiety was so big and that gave me trouble until I understood oxalate, thanks to Sally K Norton.

I do agree that twenty years ago we don't understand the fine tuning we know now. Like I look back on my Atkins mistakes, when food sensitivities would have been as important as carbs. Not that this was Dr Atkins fault, or anything, but the long lag between eating something, and it having an effect, makes it confusing. This is how I fell back on what was once a medical practice/elimination diet: meat only and add one thing at a time, for a week at a time, etc.

Especially now helpful in autoimmune, and despite Carnivore's "macho rep" it's women with 80% of the autoimmune, and they are thrilled with it. I've read so many memoirs now of how women diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder don't realize this "tags them" as incurable. One woman's dramatic issues were fixed with B-12 from eating more animal foods. While most women get told to "eat more plant-based" which would make a deficiency worse.

Currently, medical science won't reverse that decision, even if their own body does. "Just in remission," they say, and women say, "What, for years? Without drugs? Hello? Is anyone listening?"

Short answer: no.

If men had the same issues, I think this link would be taken more seriously. There's documented bias in medicine, partly because of its long history as a "hobby of gentlemen." Who are irreprochable.

I see plenty of men on Youtube talking about their autoimmune being greatly helped by carniovore, and the comments indicated they don't see doctors at the same rate. Significant when it comes to "rates of diagnosis." What if men are more prone to CVD instead? We know inflammation is a factor, but maybe expressed differently, for zillions of reasons.

I think autoimmune is so variable it simply eludes detection with vague internal stuff, including mental illness risk going up from all the routine inflammation.

Xylitol and erythritol are also "natural". Our bodies actually create them, but it isn't a good thing when they're at too high of a level. I've narrowed down to stevia and monk fruit.

"NutraSweet" is also "natural." But too much is dangerous, like children with PKU.

Exactly, chasing the very thing, sweetness, that got me into trouble as I got older before embracing low carb is foolhardy for me, but my curiosity gets the best of me sometimes. Allulose is interesting, and for me, it was too good to be true. Shortly after my N=1 with Allulose this spring, I got an ocular migraine. Happens to me with Aspartame as well. It's a correlation, as I can't prove it was due to the Allulose, but it occurred after taking it for the second time when I mixed a very small amount in my whey protein drink. I really didn't care about the purported GLP-1 effects, as I'm not trying to lose weight. But after stopping the Allulose experiment, I haven't had an issue. One dynamic with Allulose is that there is a product, RxSugar, which has noteworthy investors who are researchers and medical professionals from the low carb, keto, paleo communities. There's a reason it's receiving a lot of publicity recently, but if it helps some people adapt without some of the negatives of other sweeteners, that's a good thing.