Low-energy sweeteners and cardiometabolic health: is there method in the madness?

Dietary Guidance, Sensory, Health and Safety Considerations When Choosing Low and No-Calorie Sweeteners

The growing global focus on the adverse health conditions associated with excessive sugar consumption has prompted health and policy organizations as well as the public to take a more mindful approach to health and wellness. In response, food and beverage companies have proactively innovated and reformulated their product portfolios to incorporate low and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCSs) as viable alternatives to sugar. LNCSs offer an effective and safe approach to delivering sweetness to foods and beverages and reducing calories and sugar intake while contributing to the enjoyment of eating. The objective of this paper is to enhance the understanding of LNCSs segmentation and definitions, dietary consumption and reduction guidance, front-of-package labeling, taste and sensory perception and physiology, metabolic efficacy and impact, as well as the overall safety of LNCSs and sugar.

Lack of Biological Plausibility and Major Methodological Issues Cast Doubt on the Association between Aspartame and Autism. Comment on Fowler et al. Daily Early-Life Exposures to Diet Soda and Aspartame Are Associated with Autism in Males: A Case-Control Study. Nutrients 2023, 15, 3772

The case-control study by Fowler et al [...].

Low-Grade Inflammation and Ultra-Processed Foods Consumption: A Review

Low-grade inflammation alters the homeostasis of the organism and favors the onset of many chronic diseases. The global growth in the prevalence of noncommunicable diseases in recent years has been accompanied by an increase in the consumption of ultra-processed foods (UPF). Known to be hyperpalatable, economic and ready-to-eat, increased consumption of UPF has already been recognized as a risk factor for several chronic diseases. Different research groups have tried to investigate whether UPF consumption could promote low-grade inflammation and thus favor the development of noncommunicable diseases. Current evidence highlights the adverse health effects of UPF characteristics, not only due to the nutrients provided by a diet rich in UPF, but also due to the non-nutritive components present in UPF and the effect they may have on gut health. This review aims to summarize the available evidence on the possible relationship between excessive UPF consumption and modulation of low-grade inflammation, as potential promoters of chronic disease.

Rationale, Design and Participants Baseline Characteristics of a Crossover Randomized Controlled Trial of the Effect of Replacing SSBs with NSBs versus Water on Glucose Tolerance, Gut Microbiome and Cardiometabolic Risk in Overweight or Obese Adult SSB Consumer: Strategies to Oppose SUGARS with Non-Nutritive Sweeteners or Water (STOP Sugars NOW) Trial and Ectopic Fat Sub-Study

BACKGROUND

Health authorities are near universal in their recommendation to replace sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) with water. Non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NSBs) are not as widely recommended as a replacement strategy due to a lack of established benefits and concerns they may induce glucose intolerance through changes in the gut microbiome. The STOP Sugars NOW trial aims to assess the effect of the substitution of NSBs (the "intended substitution") versus water (the "standard of care substitution") for SSBs on glucose tolerance and microbiota diversity.

DESIGN AND METHODS

The STOP Sugars NOW trial (NCT03543644) is a pragmatic, "head-to-head", open-label, crossover, randomized controlled trial conducted in an outpatient setting. Participants were overweight or obese adults with a high waist circumference who regularly consumed ≥1 SSBs daily. Each participant completed three 4-week treatment phases (usual SSBs, matched NSBs, or water) in random order, which were separated by ≥4-week washout. Blocked randomization was performed centrally by computer with allocation concealment. Outcome assessment was blinded; however, blinding of participants and trial personnel was not possible. The two primary outcomes are oral glucose tolerance (incremental area under the curve) and gut microbiota beta-diversity (weighted UniFrac distance). Secondary outcomes include related markers of adiposity and glucose and insulin regulation. Adherence was assessed by objective biomarkers of added sugars and non-nutritive sweeteners and self-report intake. A subset of participants was included in an Ectopic Fat sub-study in which the primary outcome is intrahepatocellular lipid (IHCL) by 1H-MRS. Analyses will be according to the intention to treat principle.

BASELINE RESULTS

Recruitment began on 1 June 2018, and the last participant completed the trial on 15 October 2020. We screened 1086 participants, of whom 80 were enrolled and randomized in the main trial and 32 of these were enrolled and randomized in the Ectopic Fat sub-study. The participants were predominantly middle-aged (mean age 41.8 ± SD 13.0 y) and had obesity (BMI of 33.7 ± 6.8 kg/m2) with a near equal ratio of female: male (51%:49%). The average baseline SSB intake was 1.9 servings/day. SSBs were replaced with matched NSB brands, sweetened with either a blend of aspartame and acesulfame-potassium (95%) or sucralose (5%).

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline characteristics for both the main and Ectopic Fat sub-study meet our inclusion criteria and represent a group with overweight or obesity, with characteristics putting them at risk for type 2 diabetes. Findings will be published in peer-reviewed open-access medical journals and provide high-level evidence to inform clinical practice guidelines and public health policy for the use NSBs in sugars reduction strategies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03543644.

The Effect of Non-Nutritive Sweetened Beverages on Postprandial Glycemic and Endocrine Responses: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background: There has been an emerging concern that non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can increase the risk of cardiometabolic disease. Much of the attention has focused on acute metabolic and endocrine responses to NNS. To examine whether these mechanisms are operational under real-world scenarios, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of acute trials comparing the effects of non-nutritive sweetened beverages (NNS beverages) with water and sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in humans. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library were searched through to January 15, 2022. We included acute, single-exposure, randomized, and non-randomized, clinical trials in humans, regardless of health status. Three patterns of intake were examined: (1) uncoupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed alone without added energy or nutrients; (2) coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed together with added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates; and (3) delayed coupling interventions, where NNS beverages were consumed as a preload prior to added energy and nutrients as carbohydrates. The primary outcome was a 2 h incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for blood glucose concentration. Secondary outcomes included 2 h iAUC for insulin, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1), gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP), peptide YY (PYY), ghrelin, leptin, and glucagon concentrations. Network meta-analysis and confidence in the network meta-analysis (CINeMA) were conducted in R-studio and CINeMA, respectively. Results: Thirty-six trials involving 472 predominantly healthy participants were included. Trials examined a variety of single NNS (acesulfame potassium, aspartame, cyclamate, saccharin, stevia, and sucralose) and NNS blends (acesulfame potassium + aspartame, acesulfame potassium + sucralose, acesulfame potassium + aspartame + cyclamate, and acesulfame potassium + aspartame + sucralose), along with matched water/unsweetened controls and SSBs sweetened with various caloric sugars (glucose, sucrose, and fructose). In uncoupling interventions, NNS beverages (single or blends) had no effect on postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, GIP, PYY, ghrelin, and glucagon responses similar to water controls (generally, low to moderate confidence), whereas SSBs sweetened with caloric sugars (glucose and sucrose) increased postprandial glucose, insulin, GLP-1, and GIP responses with no differences in postprandial ghrelin and glucagon responses (generally, low to moderate confidence). In coupling and delayed coupling interventions, NNS beverages had no postprandial glucose and endocrine effects similar to controls (generally, low to moderate confidence). Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that NNS beverages sweetened with single or blends of NNS have no acute metabolic and endocrine effects, similar to water. These findings provide support for NNS beverages as an alternative replacement strategy for SSBs in the acute postprandial setting.

Relation of Change or Substitution of Low- and No-Calorie Sweetened Beverages With Cardiometabolic Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies

BACKGROUND

Adverse associations of low- and no-calorie sweetened beverages (LNCSB) with cardiometabolic outcomes in observational studies may be explained by reverse causality and residual confounding.

PURPOSE

To address these limitations we used change analyses of repeated measures of intake and substitution analyses to synthesize the association of LNCSB with cardiometabolic outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched up to 10 June 2021 for prospective cohort studies with ≥1 year of follow-up duration in adults.

STUDY SELECTION

Outcomes included changes in clinical measures of adiposity, risk of overweight/obesity, metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes (T2D), cardiovascular disease, and total mortality.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two independent reviewers extracted data, assessed study quality, and assessed certainty of evidence using GRADE. Data were pooled with a random-effects model and expressed as mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 14 cohorts (416,830 participants) met the eligibility criteria. Increase in LNCSB intake was associated with lower weight (5 cohorts, 130,020 participants; MD -0.008 kg/year [95% CI -0.014, -0.002]). Substitution of LNCSB for sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) was associated with lower weight (three cohorts, 165,579 participants; MD, -0.12 [-0.14, -0.10,] kg/y) and lower incidence of obesity (OB) (one cohort, 15,765 participants; RR 0.88 [95% CI 0.88, 0.89]), coronary heart disease (six cohorts, 233,676 participants; 0.89 [0.81, 0.98]), cardiovascular disease mortality (one cohort, 118,363 participants; 0.95 [0.90, 0.99]), and total mortality (one cohort, 118,363 participants; 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]) with no adverse associations across other outcomes. Substitution of water for SSB showed lower weight (three cohorts, 165,579 participants; MD -0.10 kg/year [-0.13, -0.06]), lower waist circumference (one cohort, 173 participants; -2.71 cm/year [-4.27, -1.15]) and percent body fat (one cohort, 173 participants; -1.51% per year [-2.61, -0.42]), and lower incidence of OB (one cohort, 15,765 participants; RR 0.85 [0.75, 0.97]) and T2D (three cohorts, 281,855 participants; 0.96 [0.94, 0.98]). Substitution of LNCSB for water showed no adverse associations.

LIMITATIONS

The evidence was low to very low certainty owing to downgrades for imprecision, indirectness, and/or inconsistency.

CONCLUSIONS

LNCSB were not associated with cardiometabolic harm in analyses that model the exposure as change or substitutions. The available evidence provides some indication that LNCSB in their intended substitution for SSB may be associated with cardiometabolic benefit, comparable with the standard of care, water.