Intense sweeteners use and weight change among women: a critique of the Stellman and Garfinkel study

The mediating role of dietary factors and leisure time physical activity on socioeconomic inequalities in body mass index among Australian adults

BACKGROUND

The relationship between socioeconomic position and obesity has been clearly established, however, the extent to which specific behavioural factors mediate this relationship is less clear. This study aimed to ascertain the contribution of specific dietary elements and leisure-time physical activity (LTPA) to variations in obesity with education in the baseline (1990-1994) Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS).

METHODS

18, 489 women and 12, 141 men were included in this cross-sectional analysis. A series of linear regression models were used in accordance with the products of coefficients method to examine the mediating role of alcohol, soft drink (regular and diet), snacks (healthy and sweet), savoury items (healthy and unhealthy), meeting fruit and vegetable guidelines and LTPA on the relationship between education and body mass index (BMI).

RESULTS

Compared to those with lowest educational attainment, those with the highest educational attainment had a 1 kg/m2 lower BMI. Among men and women, 27% and 48%, respectively, of this disparity was attributable to differences in LTPA and diet. Unhealthy savoury item consumption and LTPA contributed most to the mediated effects for men and women. Alcohol and diet soft drink were additionally important mediators for women.

CONCLUSIONS

Diet and LTPA are potentially modifiable behavioural risk factors for the development of obesity that contribute substantially to inequalities in BMI. Our findings highlight the importance of specific behaviours which may be useful to the implementation of effective, targeted public policy to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in obesity.

Nonnutritive sweetener consumption in humans: effects on appetite and food intake and their putative mechanisms

Nonnutritive sweeteners (NNS) are ecologically novel chemosensory signaling compounds that influence ingestive processes and behavior. Only about 15% of the US population aged >2 y ingest NNS, but the incidence is increasing. These sweeteners have the potential to moderate sugar and energy intakes while maintaining diet palatability, but their use has increased in concert with BMI in the population. This association may be coincidental or causal, and either mode of directionality is plausible. A critical review of the literature suggests that the addition of NNS to non-energy-yielding products may heighten appetite, but this is not observed under the more common condition in which NNS is ingested in conjunction with other energy sources. Substitution of NNS for a nutritive sweetener generally elicits incomplete energy compensation, but evidence of long-term efficacy for weight management is not available. The addition of NNS to diets poses no benefit for weight loss or reduced weight gain without energy restriction. There are long-standing and recent concerns that inclusion of NNS in the diet promotes energy intake and contributes to obesity. Most of the purported mechanisms by which this occurs are not supported by the available evidence, although some warrant further consideration. Resolution of this important issue will require long-term randomized controlled trials.

Relationships between human thirst, hunger, drinking, and feeding

There is a widely held view that hunger prompts feeding to ensure energy needs are met, while thirst cues drinking to address hydration requirements. However, recent changes in the nature of the food supply and eating patterns have raised questions about the functionality of these relationships with respect to maintaining energy balance. The increasing consumption of energy-yielding beverages and foods with diluted energy density, through the use of ingredients such as high-intensity sweeteners and fat replacers, poses new challenges to presumed homeostatic energy regulatory mechanisms. This review draws on findings from a recent observational study and other published evidence to explore whether shifts of food composition and use patterns may be disrupting relationships between thirst, hunger, drinking, and eating, resulting in positive energy balance (e.g., drinking low satiety, energy-yielding beverages in response to hunger). The observational study entailed collecting hourly appetitive ratings and dietary recalls from 50 adults for seven consecutive days. These data reveal a clear bimodal daily hunger pattern, whereas thirst is stronger and more stable throughout the day. Further, approximately 75% of fluid intake occurs peri-prandially, with the majority derived from energy-yielding beverages. While there is published evidence that drinking is responsive to feeding, support for the view that drinking is the more tightly regulated behavior is stronger. Our data indicates that, due to a number of plausible factors, neither absolute values nor changes of hunger or thirst are strong predictors of energy intake. However, it is proposed that stable, high thirst facilitates drinking, and with the increased availability and use of energy-yielding beverages that have low satiety properties, can promote positive energy balance. There are marked individual differences in mean daily hunger and thirst ratings with unknown implications for energy balance.

Aspartame: review of safety

Over 20 years have elapsed since aspartame was approved by regulatory agencies as a sweetener and flavor enhancer. The safety of aspartame and its metabolic constituents was established through extensive toxicology studies in laboratory animals, using much greater doses than people could possibly consume. Its safety was further confirmed through studies in several human subpopulations, including healthy infants, children, adolescents, and adults; obese individuals; diabetics; lactating women; and individuals heterozygous (PKUH) for the genetic disease phenylketonuria (PKU) who have a decreased ability to metabolize the essential amino acid, phenylalanine. Several scientific issues continued to be raised after approval, largely as a concern for theoretical toxicity from its metabolic components--the amino acids, aspartate and phenylalanine, and methanol--even though dietary exposure to these components is much greater than from aspartame. Nonetheless, additional research, including evaluations of possible associations between aspartame and headaches, seizures, behavior, cognition, and mood as well as allergic-type reactions and use by potentially sensitive subpopulations, has continued after approval. These findings are reviewed here. The safety testing of aspartame has gone well beyond that required to evaluate the safety of a food additive. When all the research on aspartame, including evaluations in both the premarketing and postmarketing periods, is examined as a whole, it is clear that aspartame is safe, and there are no unresolved questions regarding its safety under conditions of intended use.