4.3 Review

Non-nutritive sweeteners: evidence for benefit vs. risk

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN LIPIDOLOGY
Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages 80-84

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MOL.0000000000000034

Keywords

artificial sweeteners; diabetes; glycemic control; non-nutritive sweeteners; obesity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of reviewIntake of added sugars in the American diet is high and has been linked to weight gain and adverse effects on glycemic control and diabetes. Several national health organizations recommend decreasing added sugars intake. Among the many strategies to consider to achieve this reduction is substitution with non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS - artificial sweeteners and stevia). The purpose of this review is to critically examine existing evidence for this strategy.Recent findingsShort-term intervention studies suggest that NNS, when substituted for added sugars, may be useful in supporting energy intake reduction, and promoting glycemic control and weight management. However, the magnitude of effect in these studies has ranged from modest to null. Compensatory eating behaviors likely diminish, and in some cases negate, potential effects. Findings from longer-term observational studies that examine associations between NNS use and obesity or type 2 diabetes are potentially confounded by reverse causality.SummaryExisting data are insufficient to clearly support or refute the effectiveness of substitution with NNS as a means of reducing added sugar intake. It is important to not lose sight of the impact of incorporating NNS-containing beverages and foods on overall diet quality when assessing potential health benefits vs. risks.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available