
Sucralose with carbohydrates may blunt the body’s ability to metabolize sugar - pseudolus
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/03/10/common-artificial-sweetener-might-be-making-you-fatter-sicker-new-study-says/
======
Someone1234
This has been hinted at before, some LCS have been measured to cause an
insulin response in spite of being low or no calorie. Insulin added to the
blood with no sugars to neutralize is bad for the body/can slowly cause
insulin resistance.

What's also interesting is that Aspartame keeps on coming out ahead in study
after study. No insulin response, no substantial side effects, and no proven
cancer risk.

From everything I've read if you're only going to consume one LCS then make it
Aspartame, it has had more research conducted on it than all of the others
combined (and frankly most, even natural, food ingredients).

~~~
friedegg
As a type 1 diabetic, I can confirm that vast quantities of aspartame do not
cause my blood sugar to rise.

~~~
abainbridge
I always assumed that when I taste something sweet, my body starts putting
insulin in my blood. Over time it learns how much to put in based on how sweet
the food tasted. If that's true, I'd expect too much insulin for food with
aspartame, BUT ALSO too little when food has real sugar, because of the long
term learning.

I'd expect a type 1 diabetic not to see either effect because the system that
aspartame wacks out of tune is turned off for them.

I appreciate that I have no actual knowledge on the subject, except that I
know the body must have control loops for this stuff and they must be kept in
calibration by some mechanism. Probably my model is too simple.

~~~
abainbridge
I can do better than assume.

"Tasting sweet food elicits insulin release prior to increasing plasma glucose
levels, known as cephalic phase insulin release"
[https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/biomedres/28/2/28_2_79/...](https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/biomedres/28/2/28_2_79/_pdf)

------
watertom
Maybe the right answer is to not use anything that is extracted and refined,
including sugar.

~~~
toomuchtodo
I like sweet things in my coffee. I also like not being overweight. Hence,
sucralose in my coffee and 1000mg daily of metformin (taken for life extension
purposes, second order effect is lowering blood sugar level). The right answer
need not be "abstain from what you enjoy" if we can hack together a solution
from diet and engineered compounds.

~~~
Spooky23
Metformin is a pretty serious drug and that is a high dose. It's one thing to
use it for off-label use like PCOS, but I would be very cautious for a more
nebulous use.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Metformin is fairly safe and toxicity doesn't occur until you reach doses that
are many, many times higher than therapeutic doses [1] [2]. Not a doctor, not
your doctor, talk to your GP before starting such a regimen (especially for
healthy kidney and liver function). My prescription was a 3 minute convo after
my annual physical ("its safe, my kidneys and liver are working, I want to
live longer [3] [4], and I will sign a waiver I won't hold you liable if
necessary"), and I would've just ordered it online if my doctor said no.

[1]
[https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/35/4/731](https://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/35/4/731)

[2]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934269/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934269/)

[3]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25041462](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25041462)

[4]
[https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02432287](https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02432287)

~~~
trenning
What does metformin do for therapeutic purposes? wiki doesn't allude to much
besides diabetes treatment.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metformin](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metformin)

~~~
Diederich
Look under the Research section:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metformin#Research](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metformin#Research)

It's the last entry. Relevant links:

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4613459/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4613459/)

[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S156816371...](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1568163717301472?via%3Dihub)

[https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28802803-metformin-
reduces-a...](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28802803-metformin-reduces-all-
cause-mortality-and-diseases-of-ageing-independent-of-its-effect-on-diabetes-
control-a-systematic-review-and-meta-analysis/)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5943638/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5943638/)

~~~
trenning
thanks I missed that section!

------
fedups
Allulose is an interesting sweetener that has the same molecular formula as
fructose, and IMO tastes much more similar to table sugar than other
sweeteners.

It has been shown to lower glycemic and insulin response when taken with other
carbs
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19155592](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19155592)

I'm guessing because of the molecular similarity I've found it to have similar
browning as sugar when cooking.

A few downsides--it has a cooling sensation depending on what I use it to
sweeten. Also if I consume too much it can cause bloating (a downside of not
being absorbed like sugar is). In general it doesn't look like it's as well
researched as other sweeteners, so it's hard to tell if there are more
subtle/long term downsides.

More here:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psicose](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psicose)

------
lidHanteyk
I can taste sucralose. It's very irritating, because it rings out as a clear
bitter note with a definite aftertaste, but none of my peers have the problem,
and so I look like a hypochondriac.

~~~
tyfon
I can taste all these "sweeteners" and they all taste bitter to me. Cola Zero
actually makes me wretch.

I just drink normal Cola but moderation is key. I have very few other sources
of sugar and I eat mostly healthy home cooked (by me) food. Lots of vegetarian
food too.

~~~
dnhz
I love diet coke. Aspartame doesn't taste as close to sugar as sucralose does,
but it has no lingering aftertaste.

~~~
phonypc
Opposite for me. Coke zero is preferable to diet coke. (Neither are good.)

~~~
tyfon
In Norwegian we have a proverb, "Smaken er som baken" which roughly translates
to "The taste is like the butt", and it is implied that they are all different
:)

I know people who prefer Zero or Diet to regular, but not many.

------
api
This is the "let's hang a chlorine on some sugar" sweetener right? It always
struck me as implausible that it would be biologically inery.

~~~
erdewit
Yes, sucralose is chlorinated sucrose (table sugar).

If the structural formula looks like a pesticide it might be better to not
ingest it.

~~~
computer23
Better not drink coffee or eat peppers then.
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/03/22/5-pes...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/kavinsenapathy/2016/03/22/5-pesticides-
we-consume-every-day/#7ce702ce779c)

------
tcharlton
n=45 Link to study: [https://www.cell.com/cell-
metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131(20)...](https://www.cell.com/cell-
metabolism/fulltext/S1550-4131\(20\)30057-7)

~~~
athenot
Low N is still interesting. If anything, it can help justify larger studies
along the same lines, since there are costs for a study and researchers have
to make their case to get the funding.

~~~
Someone1234
It isn't "Low N" though. 45 adults for a clinical study like this one is
actually a very respectable size, particularly given their measures (and their
respective reliability/studies backing them).

Seems like every study I read non-science people accuse it of having too few
participants, without even considering the type of study (clinical Vs.
statistical) and measures (subjective Vs. objective, reliability, literature,
etc).

This is not a "Low N" study. If you believe it is then explain the statistics
or methodology problems.

~~~
athenot
Yes, that too. Also it's important to realize that each study is a datapoint
unto itself, and over time these data points paint a picture. But even if the
study is not the whole picture, we can still get a hint as to what that
picture is shaping to be.

------
ThrowawayR2
The natural question that comes to mind is what ratio mixture of a sugar and
an artificial sweetener can be used without encountering the negative
metabolic effects. Being able to reduce sugar and calorie intake using such a
mixture would still be better than nothing.

------
hinkley
When these sorts of studies first came out, I came to grips with the notion
that honesty was the best policy.

Lying to your body about what it’s eating seems not to work out. You need a
healthier relationship with sweets, not sugar.

~~~
rconti
Yup, it always makes me think "TANSTAAFL". I used to be a big soda drinker in
my teens; pretty much cut it out as an adult but those calories were probably
replaced with beer.

As someone who meal tracks and exercises regularly, I definitely generally
feel (calories in)-(calories out) is most of what matters, BUT, once you start
doing that, there just isn't much room for junk. You can't really exercise
your way out of a tub of ice cream a day. The more you work out, the more
(good) fuel you're gonna need, so there's only so much wiggle room for junk.

Sadly, when I do have my soda-or-two a month, because I DO calorie count, I've
finally given in and started having something like Coke Zero, but I should
probably stop lying to myself, just have the real thing, and track it for the
calories it has :)

------
m0zg
Strange study. Maltodextrin is basically pure glucose, it hits the bloodstream
right away and in a very high concentration. This is why it is used in
"gainers" bodybuilders take after hard workouts, to trigger insulin response
and replenish muscle glycogen.

Sucrose has to go through the liver first, so its release and concentration
will necessarily be much lower. Not as low as for fructose, but lower than for
maltodextrin. Its half life will be longer as well.

The point is, the two sugars aren't even using the same metabolic pathways,
and yet they compare them as interchangeable. WTF?

------
thorwasdfasdf
I've always thought that LCS were far less harmful than sugar because your
consuming 10 times less of the substance than a taste equivalent amount of
sugar. You'll notice that when you consume a combination of Sucralose and
maltodextrix, there's 10 times less of it (but they make 1tsp taste equivalnet
to 1 tsp of sugar), but density is 10 times less.

If this isn't true, then it blows my mind!

~~~
resoluteteeth
Why would the amount of maltodextrin in granulated sucralose products that
combine maltodextrin with sucralose have anything to do with the question of
whether sucralose is bad for you?

~~~
thorwasdfasdf
Because there's 10 times less of it there.

Hypothetically, if maltodextrin was equally bad for you as sugar, then you'd
consume 10 times less harm.

------
CyanLite4
Stevia tastes better and has no insulin response.

~~~
magduf
Stevia tastes bitter and nasty. It's not even sweet.

~~~
cptskippy
I wonder if people have dramatically different sensations to artificial
sweeteners like they do foods such as Cilantro or Grapefruit.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Sounds like the perfect study for 23andme (they did a cilantro study [1]).

[1] [https://blog.23andme.com/23andme-research/the-genetics-of-
ci...](https://blog.23andme.com/23andme-research/the-genetics-of-cilantro-
taste-preference/)

------
fortran77
Would it just be better for people who are getting too much sugar to eat less
of it?

~~~
throwaway55554
What does the quantity of food consumed have to do with this?

------
somurzakov
thanks for the article. I am cutting down on all sugar completely. Already
started feeling better and lost some weight just by cutting the sugar.

