The non-nutritive sweetener sucralose increases ß-arrestin signaling at the constitutively active orphan G protein-coupled receptor GPR52.

Non-nutritive sweeteners are popular food additives owing to their low caloric density and powerful sweetness relative to natural sugars. Their lack of metabolism contributes to evidence proclaiming their safety, yet several studies contradict this, demonstrating that sweeteners activate sweet taste G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and elicit deleterious metabolic functions through unknown mechanisms. We hypothesize that activation of GPCRs, particularly orphan receptors due to their abundance in metabolically active tissues, contributes to the biological activity of sweeteners. We quantified the response of 64 orphans to the sweeteners saccharin and sucralose using a high-throughput ß-arrestin-2 recruitment assay (PRESTO-Tango). GPR52 was the sole receptor that significantly responded to a mixture of sucralose and saccharin. Subsequent experiments revealed sucralose as the activating sweetener. Activation of GPR52 was concentration-dependent, with an EC50 of 0.23 mmol/L and an Emax of 3.43 ± 0.24 fold change at 4 mmol/L. GPR52 constitutively activates CRE pathways; however, we show that sucralose-induced activation of GPR52 does not further activate this pathway. Identification of this novel sucralose-GPCR interaction supports the notion that sucralose elicits off-target signaling through the activation of GPR52, calling into question sucralose's assumed lack of bioactivity.

Effect of Non- and Low-Caloric Sweeteners on Substrate Oxidation, Energy Expenditure, and Catecholamines in Humans-A Systematic Review.

The use of non- and low-caloric sweetener(s) (NCS and LCS) as a means to prevent overweight and obesity is highly debated, as both NCS and LCS have been proposed to have a negative impact on energy homeostasis. This systematic review aimed to assess the impact of NCS and LCS on fasting and postprandial substrate oxidation, energy expenditure, and catecholamines, compared to caloric sweeteners or water, across different doses and types of NCS and LCS, acutely and in the longer-term. A total of 20 studies were eligible: 16 studies for substrate oxidation and energy expenditure and four studies for catecholamines. Most studies compared the acute effects of NCS or LCS with caloric sweeteners under non-isoenergetic conditions. These studies generally found higher fat oxidation and lower carbohydrate oxidation with NCS or LCS than with caloric sweeteners. Findings for energy expenditure were inconsistent. With the limited number of studies, no convincing pattern for the remaining outcomes and comparisons could be seen. In conclusion, drinks or meals with NCS or LCS resulted in higher fat and lower carbohydrate oxidation compared to caloric sweeteners. No other conclusions could be drawn due to insufficient or inconsistent results. Further studies in this research field are warranted.

Non-Nutritive Sweeteners Acesulfame Potassium and Sucralose Are Competitive Inhibitors of the Human P-glycoprotein/Multidrug Resistance Protein 1 (PGP/MDR1).

Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) are popular sugar replacements used in foods, beverages, and medications. Although NNS are considered safe by regulatory organizations, their effects on physiological processes such as detoxification are incompletely understood. Previous studies revealed that the NNS sucralose (Sucr) altered P-glycoprotein (PGP) expression in rat colon. We also demonstrated that early-life exposure to NNS Sucr and acesulfame potassium (AceK) compromises mouse liver detoxification. Building upon these initial discoveries, we investigated the impact of AceK and Sucr on the PGP transporter in human cells to assess whether NNS influence its key role in cellular detoxification and drug metabolism. We showed that AceK and Sucr acted as PGP inhibitors, competing for the natural substrate-binding pocket of PGP. Most importantly, this was observed after exposure to concentrations of NNS within expected levels from common foods and beverage consumption. This may suggest risks for NNS consumers, either when taking medications that require PGP as the primary detoxification transporter or during exposure to toxic compounds.

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.

Effect of continuous sweet gustatory stimulation on salivary flow rate over time.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine changes in saliva secretion and subjective taste intensity during a sustained period with continuous gustatory stimulation. DESIGN: Twenty-two healthy adults participated in this study. The selected taste solutions were aspartame, sucralose, and acesulfame potassium, which are nonnutritive sweeteners. The concentrations of sucralose1 and acesulfame potassium were set to show the same sweetness intensity as aspartame. Sucralose2 was twice the concentration of sucralose1. The solution was continuously fed into the oral cavity at a flow rate of 0.04 mL / min through a neck-worn precise infusion system. The salivary flow rate (g/min) after 10 min of intraoral water supply from the device was used as the baseline. Salivary flow rate, subjective taste intensity evaluated by the visual analog scale (VAS), and salivary flow rate relative to the baseline were recorded at 10, 30, 60, and 120 min after the start of the test. RESULTS: In the aspartame, sucralose1, and sucralose2 groups, the salivary flow rate increased significantly from 10 min to 120 min after the start of the test when compared to the rate at baseline (p < 0.05). The relative salivary flow rate increased and the VAS value decreased significantly over time and were affected by the time factor (p < 0.001, p = 0.013, respectively) but not by the sweetener-group factor and the interaction effects. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous gustatory stimulation may maintain increased salivary production for a sustained period.

The Effect of Nonnutritive Sweeteners on the Antimicrobial Activity of Eucalyptus Extracts against Salivary Mutans Streptococci (in-vitro Study).

The eucalyptus tree is an excellent source of antimicrobial agents; it is used in many oral cure products. The bitter taste of these agents could compromise their usage. Therefore, fortifying the extracts with non-nutritive sweeteners could be a promising procedure for masking their unpleasant taste. This study was an in vitro evaluation of the antimicrobial activity of eucalyptus (alcoholic and aqueous) extracts against salivary Streptococci mutans. It aimed to investigate the effect of non-nutritive sweeteners on the antimicrobial activity of these extracts against salivary S. mutans. The test microbes were sensitive to different concentrations of eucalyptus alcoholic and aqueous extract, and the inhibition zone increased as the concentration of the extracts increased. All the Mutans isolates were killed at a concentration of 75 mg/ml for the alcoholic extract and 175 mg/ml for the aqueous extracts. In this experiment, the concentration of up to 15% stevia and up to 5% sucralose did not affect the antimicrobial activity of eucalyptus alcoholic extract. While the concentration of up to 1% of stevia and sucralose did not interfere with the antimicrobial activity of aqueous eucalyptus extract against salivary S. mutans. An increase in the concentration of non-nutritive sweeteners in this experiment appeared to interfere with the antimicrobial activity of eucalyptus extract against salivary S. mutans.

Mapping the Homeostatic and Hedonic Brain Responses to Stevia Compared to Caloric Sweeteners and Water: A Double-Blind Randomised Controlled Crossover Trial in Healthy Adults.

Non-nutritive sweeteners have potential effects on brain function. We investigated neural correlates of responses to beverages differing in sweetness and calories. Healthy participants completed 4 randomised sessions: water vs. water with stevia, glucose, or maltodextrin. Blood-oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) contrast was monitored for 30 min post-ingestion by functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. A food visual probe task at baseline was repeated at 30 min. A significant interaction of taste-by-calories-by-time was demonstrated mainly in motor, frontal, and insula cortices. Consumption of the stevia-sweetened beverage resulted in greater BOLD decrease, especially in the 20-30 min period, compared to other beverages. There was a significant interaction of taste-by-time in BOLD response in gustatory and reward areas; sweet beverages induced greater reduction in BOLD compared to non-sweet. The interaction calories-by-time showed significantly greater incremental area under the curve in thalamic, visual, frontal, and parietal areas for glucose and maltodextrin 10-20 min post-consumption only, compared to water. In the visual cue task, the water demonstrated an increased response in the visual cortex to food images post-consumption; however, no difference was observed for the three sweet/caloric beverages. In conclusion, both sweet taste and calories exert modulatory effects, but stevia showed a more robust and prolonged effect.

Personalized microbiome-driven effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on human glucose tolerance.

Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) are commonly integrated into human diet and presumed to be inert; however, animal studies suggest that they may impact the microbiome and downstream glycemic responses. We causally assessed NNS impacts in humans and their microbiomes in a randomized-controlled trial encompassing 120 healthy adults, administered saccharin, sucralose, aspartame, and stevia sachets for 2 weeks in doses lower than the acceptable daily intake, compared with controls receiving sachet-contained vehicle glucose or no supplement. As groups, each administered NNS distinctly altered stool and oral microbiome and plasma metabolome, whereas saccharin and sucralose significantly impaired glycemic responses. Importantly, gnotobiotic mice conventionalized with microbiomes from multiple top and bottom responders of each of the four NNS-supplemented groups featured glycemic responses largely reflecting those noted in respective human donors, which were preempted by distinct microbial signals, as exemplified by sucralose. Collectively, human NNS consumption may induce person-specific, microbiome-dependent glycemic alterations, necessitating future assessment of clinical implications.

Chronic intake of nutritive sweeteners and saccharin increases levels of glycolytic and lipogenic enzymes in rat liver.

There are doubts about the impact of non-nutritive sweeteners consumption on lipogenic and glycolytic metabolism. Therefore, the objective was to determine the effects of chronic consumption of sweeteners on the activity levels of the enzymes glucokinase (GK), phosphofructokinase-1 (PFK-1), pyruvate kinase (PKL), acetyl coenzyme A carboxylase (ACC), and fatty acid synthase (FAS) in livers' extracts. Groups of male and female Wistar rats drank solutions of sweeteners for 480 days: Sucrose 10%, glucose 14%, fructose 7%, acesulfame K 0.05%, aspartame:acesulfame mixture 1.55%, sucralose 0.017%, saccharin 0.033%, and a control group. The enzymatic activity in livers' extracts was determined. Likewise, the levels of glucose, triglycerides, insulin, glucagon, and leptin were determined. In both genders, there were significant differences in the levels of enzymatic activity, hormonal, and biochemical parameters due to sweeteners consumption. The highest glycolytic and lipogenic enzyme activity levels were observed in the groups that ingested nutritive sweeteners and saccharin.

The Effect of Artificial Sweeteners Use on Sweet Taste Perception and Weight Loss Efficacy: A Review.

Excessive consumption of sugar-rich foods is currently one of the most important factors that has led to the development of the global pandemic of obesity. On the other hand, there is evidence that obesity contributes to reduced sensitivity to sweet taste and hormonal changes affecting appetite, leading to an increased craving for sweets. A high intake of sugars increases the caloric value of the diet and, consequently, leads to weight gain. Moreover, attention is drawn to the concept of the addictive properties of sugar and sugary foods. A potential method to reduce the energy value of diet while maintaining the sweet taste is using non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS). NNS are commonly used as table sugar substitutes. This wide group of chemical compounds features high sweetness almost without calories due to its high sweetening strength. NNS include aspartame, acesulfame-K, sucralose, saccharin, cyclamate, neohesperidin dihydrochalcone (neohesperidin DC), neotame, taumatin, and advantame. The available evidence suggests that replacing sugar with NNS may support weight control. However, the effect of NNS on the regulation of appetite and sweet taste perception is not clear. Therefore, the review aimed to summarize the current knowledge about the use of NNS as a potential strategy for weight loss and their impact on sweet taste perception. Most studies have demonstrated that consumption of NNS-sweetened foods does not increase sweetness preference orenergy intake. Nonetheless, further research is required to determine the long-term effects of NNS on weight management.

Análisis comparativo de respuesta glicémica y de péptido C, tras la ingesta de estevia y D-tagatosa, según habitualidad de consumo de edulcorantes no nutritivos y preferencias alimentarias reportadas por mujeres con resistencia a la insulina / Comparative analysis of glicemic response and c peptide, after comsumption of stevia and d tagatosa, according to regular compsumtion of not nutritive sweeteners andnourish preferences reported by woman with insuline resistance

INTRODUCCIÓN: El consumo de edulcorantes no nutritivos (ENN) ha ido en aumento. A pesar de ello, se desconoce el efecto entre el consumo habitual de ENN y las preferencias alimentarias con parámetros bioquímicos en pacientes con resistencia a la insulina. OBJETIVO: Comparar la respuesta glicémica y de péptido C, según habitualidad de consumo de edulcorantes y preferencias alimentarias reportados por mujeres con resistencia a la insulina tras la ingesta de estevia y D-tagatosa. MÉTODOS: Treinta y tres mujeres con RI se sometieron a una encuesta de opción múltiple sobre preferencias alimentarias y ETCC modificada de edulcorantes. Aleatoriamente recibieron una precarga de control o experimental (estevia y D-tagatosa) donde se midió glicemia y péptido C en los tiempos -10, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180. RESULTADOS: Se encontró un ABC de péptido C más alto después de la ingesta de D-tagatosa (p = 0,02) en pacientes que prefieren alimentos ricos en proteínas en comparación con aquellos que prefieren alimentos ricos en grasas o en carbohidratos simples. Se observó un mayor ABC de péptido C (p = 0,04) para la prueba control en quienes prefieren el sabor salado y consumen menor cantidad de ENN, sin diferencias significativas entre quienes prefirieron sabor dulce. CONCLUSIONES: Al comparar las respuestas glicémicas e insulinémicas entre habitualidad de consumo de edulcorantes y preferencias alimentarias reportados por las pacientes tras la ingesta de agua, estevia y D-Tagatosa, no se obtuvieron diferencias significativas. Salvo en quienes preferían alimentos ricos en proteínas tras la ingesta de D- tagatosa y quienes preferían sabor salado con menor consumo habitual de ENN tras ingesta control.

INTRODUCTION: The consumption of non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) has been increasing. Despite this, the effect between the habitual consumption of ENN and food preferences with biochemical parameters in patients with insulin resistance is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the glycemic and C-peptide response, according to the habitual consumption of sweeteners and food preferences reported by women with insulin resistance after ingesting stevia and D-tagatose. METHODS: Thirty-three women with IR underwent a multiple choice survey on food preferences and modified ETCC for sweeteners. They randomly received a control or experimental preload (stevia and D-tagatose) where glycemia and peptide C were measured at times -10, 30, 60, 90, 120, 180. RESULTS: A higher C-peptide AUC was found after ingestion of D-tagatose (p = 0.02) in patients who prefer foods rich in protein compared to those who prefer foods rich in fat or simple carbohydrates. A higher AUC of peptide C (p = 0.04) is performed for the control test in those who prefer a salty taste and consume a lower amount of ENN, without significant differences between those who prefer a sweet taste. CONCLUSION: When comparing the glycerol and insulin responses between the habitual consumption of sweeteners and the food preferences reported by the patients after the ingestion of water, stevia and D-Tagatose, no significant differences were obtained. Except in those who prefer foods rich in protein after ingesting D-tagatose and those who prefer salty taste with less habitual consumption of NNS after control intake.

Motivational factors controlling flavor preference learning and performance: Effects of preexposure with nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners.

In three experiments thirsty rats were given exposure to a sweet solution (saccharin in some experiments, sucrose in others) prior to consuming a compound of the sweet substance and almond flavoring. Preference for that flavor, in a choice test of almond vs. water, was then assessed. In some cases the rats were hungry, in others they were not. When the sweetener used was saccharin, preexposure reduced the magnitude of the preference obtained on test in both hungry and nonhungry rats. When the sweetener was sucrose, preexposure had this effect only when the rats were hungry. The effects produced after preexposure to saccharin are interpreted as being the result of habituation to its sensory features that reduces the ability of these features to engage in subsequent learning. These effects will occur whether the animal is hungry or not. The results for sucrose are interpreted in terms of the fact that it possesses both sensory and nutritional properties, the role of the latter being dependent on the motivational state of subject. It is suggested that the sensory features of sucrose do not undergo habituation, but that an effect of preexposure can be obtained in hungry rats when the source of the learned preference will depend on learning about the nutritive consequences of the sucrose.

Low-Calorie Sweeteners with Carbohydrate Do Not Impair Insulin Sensitivity in Humans: Re-analysis Highlighting the Importance of the Comparator.

The lack of appropriate comparator can lead to incorrect interpretation of results regarding low-calorie sweeteners. The result of a re-analysis of the study by Dalenberg et al. shows that the impairment of insulin sensitivity by sucralose in combination with carbohydrate may be explained by the carbohydrate component rather than the low-calorie sweetener.

The effects of low-calorie sweeteners on energy intake and body weight: a systematic review and meta-analyses of sustained intervention studies.

Previous meta-analyses of intervention studies have come to different conclusions about effects of consumption of low-calorie sweeteners (LCS) on body weight. The present review included 60 articles reporting 88 parallel-groups and cross-over studies ≥1 week in duration that reported either body weight (BW), BMI and/or energy intake (EI) outcomes. Studies were analysed according to whether they compared (1) LCS with sugar, (2) LCS with water or nothing, or (3) LCS capsules with placebo capsules. Results showed an effect in favour of LCS vs sugar for BW (29 parallel-groups studies, 2267 participants: BW change, -1.06 kg, 95% CI -1.50 to -0.62, I2 = 51%), BMI and EI. Effect on BW change increased with 'dose' of sugar replaced by LCS, whereas there were no differences in study outcome as a function of duration of the intervention or participant blinding. Overall, results showed no difference in effects of LCS vs water/nothing for BW (11 parallel-groups studies, 1068 participants: BW change, 0.10 kg, 95% CI -0.87 to 1.07, I2 = 82%), BMI and EI; and inconsistent effects for LCS consumed in capsules (BW change: -0.28 kg, 95% CI -0.80 to 0.25, I2 = 0%; BMI change: 0.20 kg/m2, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.36, I2 = 0%). Occurrence of adverse events was not affected by the consumption of LCS. The studies available did not permit robust analysis of effects by LCS type. In summary, outcomes were not clearly affected when the treatments differed in sweetness, nor when LCS were consumed in capsules without tasting; however, when treatments differed in energy value (LCS vs sugar), there were consistent effects in favour of LCS. The evidence from human intervention studies supports the use of LCS in weight management, constrained primarily by the amount of added sugar that LCS can displace in the diet.

Changes in Appetite Regulation-Related Signaling Pathways in the Brain of Mice Supplemented with Non-nutritive Sweeteners.

Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNSs) are commonly used to prevent weight gain and development of metabolic diseases associated with consumption of high-energy diets. Recent studies have demonstrated that these compounds may have unwanted detrimental effects under specific circumstances in vivo. In particular, an association between NNS consumption and changes in signaling pathways involved in the hunger-satiety system in the brain has been reported. Nonetheless, the extent of alterations in brain signaling pathways associated with consumption of these compounds has not been determined. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of frequent consumption of NNSs on the expression of proteins involved in signaling pathways related to appetite control in the brain in vivo. Eight-week-old BALB/c mice were supplemented with sucrose, sucralose, or steviol glycosides in their daily drinking water for 6 weeks. Subsequently, total brain protein extracts were used to analyze the expression of total and phosphorylated JAK2, STAT5, ERK 1/2, JNK, as well as SHP-2 and POMC, by western blot. Serum concentrations of leptin and α-MSH were quantified by ELISA. Results show that consumption of NNSs promotes significant changes in these signaling pathways, reducing the expression of pSTAT5/STAT5, pERK 1/2, SHP-2, and pJNK/JNK in male mice supplemented with steviol glycosides. Furthermore, consumption of steviol glycosides induced a decrease of α-MSH in male mice. In contrast, steviol glycosides induced overexpression of pSTAT5, pERK, and SHP-2 in females. These data suggest that chronic consumption of NNSs promotes sex-specific changes in signaling pathways related to the central hunger-satiety system in vivo.

Changes in Non-Nutritive Sweetener Consumption Patterns in Response to a Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Reduction Intervention.

Data are lacking on whether non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) can be used as a strategy to support decreases in sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption. The purpose of this secondary analysis of a 6-month SSB-reduction intervention was to explore changes in NNS consumption patterns in Talking Health participants within the SIPsmartER (n = 101) intervention. Additionally, participant characteristics were compared for three SSB-NNS change groups (decrease SSB/increase NNS; decrease SSB/no increase in NNS; increase/no change in SSB/regardless of NNS). There was a significant increase in aspartame and total NNS intake for participants (mean daily mg increases of 37.2 ± 13.9 and 63.7 ± 18.5, respectively). With the exception of sex, no differences in participant characteristics were found between the three SSB-NNS change groups. Furthermore, no significant changes in weight or body mass index (BMI) were demonstrated between SSB-NNS change groups over time. Diet soda was the most commonly consumed source of NNS; however, other dietary sources of NNS also contributed to intake. At 6 months, intake of sucralose and saccharin were primarily from dietary sources other than diet sodas (94% and 100%, respectively). These findings suggest that NNS may be a feasible strategy to help reduce SSB consumption. This study supports the need to consistently quantify and identify NNS intake, beyond using diet soda intake as a proxy for NNS intake and grouping all NNS types into one variable, to more accurately address the potential health effects of NNS.

The Effects of Non-Nutritive Artificial Sweeteners, Aspartame and Sucralose, on the Gut Microbiome in Healthy Adults: Secondary Outcomes of a Randomized Double-Blinded Crossover Clinical Trial.

Non-nutritive artificial sweeteners (NNSs) may have the ability to change the gut microbiota, which could potentially alter glucose metabolism. This study aimed to determine the effect of sucralose and aspartame consumption on gut microbiota composition using realistic doses of NNSs. Seventeen healthy participants between the ages of 18 and 45 years who had a body mass index (BMI) of 20-25 were selected. They undertook two 14-day treatment periods separated by a four-week washout period. The sweeteners consumed by each participant consisted of a standardized dose of 14% (0.425 g) of the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for aspartame and 20% (0.136 g) of the ADI for sucralose. Faecal samples collected before and after treatments were analysed for microbiome and short-chain fatty acids (SCFAs). There were no differences in the median relative proportions of the most abundant bacterial taxa (family and genus) before and after treatments with both NNSs. The microbiota community structure also did not show any obvious differences. There were no differences in faecal SCFAs following the consumption of the NNSs. These findings suggest that daily repeated consumption of pure aspartame or sucralose in doses reflective of typical high consumption have minimal effect on gut microbiota composition or SCFA production.

How Does Our Brain Process Sugars and Non-Nutritive Sweeteners Differently: A Systematic Review on Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies.

This systematic review aimed to reveal the differential brain processing of sugars and sweeteners in humans. Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies published up to 2019 were retrieved from two databases and were included into the review if they evaluated the effects of both sugars and sweeteners on the subjects' brain responses, during tasting and right after ingestion. Twenty studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The number of participants per study ranged from 5 to 42, with a total number of study participants at 396. Seven studies recruited both males and females, 7 were all-female and 6 were all-male. There was no consistent pattern showing that sugar or sweeteners elicited larger brain responses. Commonly involved brain regions were insula/operculum, cingulate and striatum, brainstem, hypothalamus and the ventral tegmental area. Future studies, therefore, should recruit a larger sample size, adopt a standardized fasting duration (preferably 12 h overnight, which is the most common practice and brain responses are larger in the state of hunger), and reported results with familywise-error rate (FWE)-corrected statistics. Every study should report the differential brain activation between sugar and non-nutritive sweetener conditions regardless of the complexity of their experiment design. These measures would enable a meta-analysis, pooling data across studies in a meaningful manner.

Effects of the Daily Consumption of Stevia on Glucose Homeostasis, Body Weight, and Energy Intake: A Randomised Open-Label 12-Week Trial in Healthy Adults.

Stevia is a non-nutritive sweetener, providing sweet taste with no calories. This randomised, controlled, open-label 2-parallel arm trial examined the effects of daily stevia consumption on glycaemia in healthy adults. Secondary endpoints included body weight (BW) and energy intake (EI). Healthy participants (n = 28; aged 25 ± 5y, body mass index 21.2 ± 1.7 kg/m2) were randomised into either the stevia group (n = 14)-required to consume a stevia extract daily-or to the control group (n = 14). At weeks 0 and 12, the glucose and insulin responses to an oral glucose tolerance test were measured; BW and EI were assessed at weeks 0, 6, and 12. There was no significant difference in the glucose or insulin responses. There was a significant main effect of group on BW change (F(1,26) = 5.56, p = 0.026), as the stevia group maintained their weight as opposed to the control group (mean weight change at week 12: -0.22 kg, 95%CI [-0.96, 0.51] stevia group, +0.89 kg, 95%CI [0.16, 1.63] control group). The energy intake was significantly decreased between week 0 and 12 in the stevia group (p = 0.003), however no change was found in the control group (p = 0.973). Although not placebo-controlled, these results suggest that daily stevia consumption does not affect glycaemia in healthy individuals, but could aid in weight maintenance and the moderation of EI.

Plausible Biological Interactions of Low- and Non-Calorie Sweeteners with the Intestinal Microbiota: An Update of Recent Studies.

Sweeteners that are a hundred thousand times sweeter than sucrose are being consumed as sugar substitutes. The effects of sweeteners on gut microbiota composition have not been completely elucidated yet, and numerous gaps related to the effects of nonnutritive sweeteners (NNS) on health still remain. The NNS aspartame and acesulfame-K do not interact with the colonic microbiota, and, as a result, potentially expected shifts in the gut microbiota are relatively limited, although acesulfame-K intake increases Firmicutes and depletes Akkermansia muciniphila populations. On the other hand, saccharin and sucralose provoke changes in the gut microbiota populations, while no health effects, either positive or negative, have been described; hence, further studies are needed to clarify these observations. Steviol glycosides might directly interact with the intestinal microbiota and need bacteria for their metabolization, thus they could potentially alter the bacterial population. Finally, the effects of polyols, which are sugar alcohols that can reach the colonic microbiota, are not completely understood; polyols have some prebiotics properties, with laxative effects, especially in patients with inflammatory bowel syndrome. In this review, we aimed to update the current evidence about sweeteners' effects on and their plausible biological interactions with the gut microbiota.