Friday, April 16, 2010

Sugar Substitutes

... "new research suggests that the body is not so easily fooled, and that sugar substitutes are no key to weight loss — perhaps helping to explain why, despite a plethora of low-calorie food and drink, Americans are heavier than ever.

"The new study, say the scientists, offers stronger evidence that how we eat may depend on automatic, conditioned responses to food that are beyond our control."

"What they mean is that like Pavlov's dog, trained to salivate at the sound of a bell, animals are similarly trained to anticipate lots of calories when they taste something sweet — in nature, sweet foods are usually loaded with calories. When an animal eats a saccharin-flavored food with no calories, however — disrupting the sweetness and calorie link — the animal tends to eat more and gain more weight, the new study shows. The study was even able to document at the physiological level that animals given artificial sweeteners responded differently to their food than those eating high-calorie sweetened foods. The sugar-fed rats, for example, showed the expected uptick in core body temperature at mealtime, corresponding to their anticipation of a bolus of calories that they would need to start burning off — a sort of metabolic revving of the energy engines. The saccharin-fed animals, on the other hand, showed no such rise in temperature. "The animals that had the artificial sweetener appear to have a different anticipatory response," says Susan Swithers, a professor of psychological sciences at Purdue University and a co-author of the study. "They don't anticipate as many calories arriving." The net result is a more sluggish metabolism that stores, rather than burns, incoming excess calories."

"Swithers ... says that the study does suggest artificial sweeteners somehow disrupt the body's ability to regulate incoming calories. "It's still a bit of a mystery why they are overeating.""

"Though it's premature to generalize based on animal results that the same phenomena would hold true in people, Swithers says, she notes that other human studies have already shown a similar effect. A University of Texas Health Science Center survey in 2005 found that people who drink diet soft drinks may actually gain weight; in that study, for every can of diet soda people consumed each day, there was a 41% increased risk of being overweight." 

My take - if you have already done some work on what you eat (and are eating predominantly meat, vegetables, nuts and seeds), and are ready to take more steps, eliminate the fake sugar products to see what that gets you.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1711763,00.html#ixzz0kSYmc4XZ

4 comments:

  1. And NY State wants to tax sugared soda. I'm all for taxing soda--it is all crap--but leaving the soda with the artificial sweeteners untaxed will only increase the obesity problem.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good point Don. Thanks.

    I'm about 50/50 on sugar taxes. First, we should stop the sugar tarrifs. Second, if we tax sugar, we should 'untax' something else, or they'll just keep coming up with a new 'sin tax' every time they spent everything they've already taken in. The really frustrating thing is it's pretty clear to me that sugar is an issue far beyond just obesity, and perhaps on par with cigarettes in terms of population illness and health care cost drivers, and most of the big wigs won't focus on those issues since 'a calorie is just a calorie.'

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that sugar--including ALL of its alternative forms--is looking worse and worse. Gluten is definitely a partner in crime, but sugar is pretty insidious. PaleoBrands just posted about sugar feeding cancer, so a low-carb diet is actually cancer-fighting. At the CrossFit Nutrition cert, Robb Wolf warned us about artificial sweeteners like those in sugarless gum. He said it gives your body the chemical signal to get ready because food is coming, but then none comes, so it is like crying wolf. It breaks your system for recognizing what is food and what isn't and how to deal with what is being ingested. Scary.

    Good topic again, Paul!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Kristy - yes! Taubes reviews that 'caner feeds on sugar better than the rest of us does' literature in GCBC. There's a study of the phenomenon in the work - here: http://fireofthegodsfitness.blogspot.com/2010/02/cure-for-cancer-is-fat.html

    Thanks for checking in!

    ReplyDelete