Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 5 de 5
Filter
Add more filters










Publication year range
1.
Nutr. hosp ; 37(1): 211-222, ene.-feb. 2020. tab
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-187591

ABSTRACT

Los edulcorantes no calóricos (ENC) son aditivos de alimentos que se utilizan para sustituir azúcares y potencialmente para reducir la ingesta energética. Existe un debate científico en torno a los beneficios reales de su uso. Los ENC son sustancias ampliamente evaluadas en la literatura científica. Su seguridad es revisada por las agencias regulatorias internacionales del campo de la salud. Los profesionales de la salud y los consumidores con frecuencia carecen de educación e información rigurosa, objetiva y sustentada en la evidencia científica y el juicio clínico sobre el uso de aditivos en los alimentos. Los ENC se han empleado como sustitutos de la sacarosa, en especial por las personas con diabetes mellitus y obesidad. Sin embargo, se han planteado inquietudes relacionadas con su posible asociación con el parto pretérmino y con su uso durante el embarazo y la lactancia, ante la posibilidad de consecuencias metabólicas o de otra índole en la madre o en el neonato. Este análisis de la evidencia en ginecología y obstetricia presenta una revisión que intenta responder a preguntas que habitualmente se hacen al respecto los profesionales de la salud y sus pacientes. En este documento se evalúan diversas publicaciones científicas bajo el tamiz de la medicina basada en la evidencia y del marco regulatorio para aditivos de alimentos con el fin dilucidar si el uso de ENC en las mujeres durante las etapas críticas del embarazo y la lactancia supone o no un posible riesgo


Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) are food additives that have been used as a possible tool to reduce energy and sugar intake. There is a scientific debate around the real benefits of their use. NNS are substances widely evaluated in the scientific literature. Their safety is reviewed by international regulatory health agencies. Health professionals and consumers often lack education and objective information about food additives based on the best scientific evidence. NNS have been used as a substitute for sucrose, especially by people with diabetes mellitus and obesity. However, concerns related to their possible association with preterm birth have been raised, and also with their use during pregnancy and lactation because of the possibility of metabolic or other consequences in both the mother and offspring. This analysis of the evidence in gynecology and obstetrics presents a review of the most commonly asked questions regarding this matter by health professionals and their patients. This document evaluates a diversity of scientific publications under the sieve of evidence-based medicine and the regulatory framework for food additives to elucidate whether the use of NNS in women in these critical stages of pregnancy and breastfeeding represents a potential risk


Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/administration & dosage , Consensus , Pregnancy Complications/diet therapy , Lactation , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/metabolism , Reproductive Health , Food Additives/administration & dosage , Obstetric Labor, Premature/diet therapy , Risk Factors
2.
Nutr Hosp ; 37(1): 211-222, 2020 Feb 17.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31960692

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) are food additives that have been used as a possible tool to reduce energy and sugar intake. There is a scientific debate around the real benefits of their use. NNS are substances widely evaluated in the scientific literature. Their safety is reviewed by international regulatory health agencies. Health professionals and consumers often lack education and objective information about food additives based on the best scientific evidence. NNS have been used as a substitute for sucrose, especially by people with diabetes mellitus and obesity. However, concerns related to their possible association with preterm birth have been raised, and also with their use during pregnancy and lactation because of the possibility of metabolic or other consequences in both the mother and offspring. This analysis of the evidence in gynecology and obstetrics presents a review of the most commonly asked questions regarding this matter by health professionals and their patients. This document evaluates a diversity of scientific publications under the sieve of evidence-based medicine and the regulatory framework for food additives to elucidate whether the use of NNS in women in these critical stages of pregnancy and breastfeeding represents a potential risk.


INTRODUCCIÓN: Los edulcorantes no calóricos (ENC) son aditivos de alimentos que se utilizan para sustituir azúcares y potencialmente para reducir la ingesta energética. Existe un debate científico en torno a los beneficios reales de su uso. Los ENC son sustancias ampliamente evaluadas en la literatura científica. Su seguridad es revisada por las agencias regulatorias internacionales del campo de la salud. Los profesionales de la salud y los consumidores con frecuencia carecen de educación e información rigurosa, objetiva y sustentada en la evidencia científica y el juicio clínico sobre el uso de aditivos en los alimentos. Los ENC se han empleado como sustitutos de la sacarosa, en especial por las personas con diabetes mellitus y obesidad. Sin embargo, se han planteado inquietudes relacionadas con su posible asociación con el parto pretérmino y con su uso durante el embarazo y la lactancia, ante la posibilidad de consecuencias metabólicas o de otra índole en la madre o en el neonato. Este análisis de la evidencia en ginecología y obstetricia presenta una revisión que intenta responder a preguntas que habitualmente se hacen al respecto los profesionales de la salud y sus pacientes. En este documento se evalúan diversas publicaciones científicas bajo el tamiz de la medicina basada en la evidencia y del marco regulatorio para aditivos de alimentos con el fin dilucidar si el uso de ENC en las mujeres durante las etapas críticas del embarazo y la lactancia supone o no un posible riesgo.


Subject(s)
Non-Nutritive Sweeteners , Abnormalities, Drug-Induced/etiology , Abnormalities, Drug-Induced/prevention & control , Diabetes, Gestational/etiology , Diabetes, Gestational/prevention & control , Evidence-Based Medicine , Female , Fetus/drug effects , Humans , Hypersensitivity/etiology , Lactation , Milk, Human/chemistry , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/adverse effects , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/pharmacokinetics , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/therapeutic use , Obstetric Labor, Premature/chemically induced , Overweight/prevention & control , Preconception Injuries/chemically induced , Preconception Injuries/prevention & control , Pregnancy , Pregnancy Complications , Prenatal Exposure Delayed Effects , Weight Gain
3.
Nutr Res Rev ; 33(1): 145-154, 2020 06.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31928558

ABSTRACT

A consensus workshop on low-calorie sweeteners (LCS) was held in November 2018 where seventeen experts (the panel) discussed three themes identified as key to the science and policy of LCS: (1) weight management and glucose control; (2) consumption, safety and perception; (3) nutrition policy. The aims were to identify the reliable facts on LCS, suggest research gaps and propose future actions. The panel agreed that the safety of LCS is demonstrated by a substantial body of evidence reviewed by regulatory experts and current levels of consumption, even for high users, are within agreed safety margins. However, better risk communication is needed. More emphasis is required on the role of LCS in helping individuals reduce their sugar and energy intake, which is a public health priority. Based on reviews of clinical evidence to date, the panel concluded that LCS can be beneficial for weight management when they are used to replace sugar in products consumed in the diet (without energy substitution). The available evidence suggests no grounds for concerns about adverse effects of LCS on sweet preference, appetite or glucose control; indeed, LCS may improve diabetic control and dietary compliance. Regarding effects on the human gut microbiota, data are limited and do not provide adequate evidence that LCS affect gut health at doses relevant to human use. The panel identified research priorities, including collation of the totality of evidence on LCS and body weight control, monitoring and modelling of LCS intakes, impacts on sugar reduction and diet quality and developing effective communication strategies to foster informed choice. There is also a need to reconcile policy discrepancies between organisations and reduce regulatory hurdles that impede low-energy product development and reformulation.


Subject(s)
Energy Intake , Sweetening Agents , Appetite , Consensus , Diet , Humans , Sweetening Agents/adverse effects
4.
Nutrients ; 10(7)2018 Jun 25.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29941818

ABSTRACT

International scientific experts in food, nutrition, dietetics, endocrinology, physical activity, paediatrics, nursing, toxicology and public health met in Lisbon on 2⁻4 July 2017 to develop a Consensus on the use of low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS) as substitutes for sugars and other caloric sweeteners. LNCS are food additives that are broadly used as sugar substitutes to sweeten foods and beverages with the addition of fewer or no calories. They are also used in medicines, health-care products, such as toothpaste, and food supplements. The goal of this Consensus was to provide a useful, evidence-based, point of reference to assist in efforts to reduce free sugars consumption in line with current international public health recommendations. Participating experts in the Lisbon Consensus analysed and evaluated the evidence in relation to the role of LNCS in food safety, their regulation and the nutritional and dietary aspects of their use in foods and beverages. The conclusions of this Consensus were: (1) LNCS are some of the most extensively evaluated dietary constituents, and their safety has been reviewed and confirmed by regulatory bodies globally including the World Health Organisation, the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Food Safety Authority; (2) Consumer education, which is based on the most robust scientific evidence and regulatory processes, on the use of products containing LNCS should be strengthened in a comprehensive and objective way; (3) The use of LNCS in weight reduction programmes that involve replacing caloric sweeteners with LNCS in the context of structured diet plans may favour sustainable weight reduction. Furthermore, their use in diabetes management programmes may contribute to a better glycaemic control in patients, albeit with modest results. LNCS also provide dental health benefits when used in place of free sugars; (4) It is proposed that foods and beverages with LNCS could be included in dietary guidelines as alternative options to products sweetened with free sugars; (5) Continued education of health professionals is required, since they are a key source of information on issues related to food and health for both the general population and patients. With this in mind, the publication of position statements and consensus documents in the academic literature are extremely desirable.


Subject(s)
Beverages/standards , Consumer Product Safety/standards , Food Safety , Food/standards , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/standards , Nutritive Sweeteners/standards , Nutritive Value , Animals , Beverages/adverse effects , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Consensus , Diabetes Mellitus/blood , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , Energy Intake , Food/adverse effects , Food Labeling/standards , Humans , Non-Nutritive Sweeteners/adverse effects , Nutritive Sweeteners/adverse effects , Obesity/epidemiology , Obesity/physiopathology , Obesity/therapy , Recommended Dietary Allowances , Risk Assessment , Weight Loss
5.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23781843

ABSTRACT

This review compares the regulations, definitions and approval processes for substances intentionally added to or unintentionally present in human food in the following specific countries/jurisdictions: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, the European Union, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, and the United States. This includes direct food additives, food ingredients, flavouring agents, food enzymes and/or processing aids, food contact materials, novel foods, and nanoscale materials for food applications. The regulatory authority of each target jurisdiction/country uses its own regulatory framework and although the definitions, regulations and approval processes may vary among all target countries, in general there are many similarities. In all cases, the main purpose of each authority is to establish a regulatory framework and maintain/enforce regulations to ensure that food consumed and sold within its respective countries is safe. There is a move towards harmonisation of food regulations, as illustrated by Australia and New Zealand and by Mercosur. The European Union has also established regulations, which are applicable for all member states, to establish a common authorisation procedure for direct food additives, flavourings and enzymes. Although the path for approval of different categories of food additives varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, there are many commonalities in terms of the data requirements and considerations for assessment of the safety of use of food additives, including the use of positive lists of approved substances, pre-market approval, and a separation between science and policy decisions. The principles applied are largely reflective of the early work by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) committees and JECFA assessments of the safety of food additives for human and animal foods.


Subject(s)
Internationality , Legislation, Food , Safety/legislation & jurisprudence
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...