Artificially Sweetened Foods and Drinks Are Less Healthy, Than Their Sugary Counterparts.

Have a question about science, health, fitness, or diet? Get cited, evidence-based insights: Consensus is an AI-Powered Academic Search Engine.

Try for free
Written by Consensus AI
8 min read

Artificially sweetened foods and drinks: Are they really healthier?

Check out this answer from Consensus:

The evidence suggests that artificially sweetened beverages may not be a healthier alternative to sugar-sweetened beverages. Both types of beverages are associated with increased risks of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and even mortality. Therefore, it is crucial to consider these findings when making dietary choices and to seek healthier alternatives beyond just switching from SSBs to ASBs.

The debate over the health implications of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) versus artificially sweetened beverages (ASBs) has been ongoing. While SSBs are widely recognized for their contribution to obesity, type 2 diabetes (T2D), and cardiovascular diseases (CVD), ASBs are often marketed as healthier alternatives. However, recent research suggests that ASBs may not be as benign as once thought. This article explores the health impacts of both SSBs and ASBs, drawing on findings from multiple studies.

Health Risks Associated with Sugar-Sweetened Beverages

Sugar-sweetened beverages have been consistently linked to various health issues. A meta-analysis found that each 250 mL/day increase in SSB intake was associated with a 12% increase in obesity risk, a 19% increase in T2D risk, a 10% increase in hypertension risk, and a 4% increase in all-cause mortality. Another study highlighted that habitual consumption of SSBs was associated with an 18% greater incidence of T2D per one serving/day. Furthermore, SSB intake has been linked to an increased risk of coronary events and possibly coronary death.

Health Risks Associated with Artificially Sweetened Beverages

Artificially sweetened beverages, often considered a healthier alternative, have also been associated with adverse health outcomes. A meta-analysis revealed that each 250 mL/day increase in ASB intake was linked to a 21% increase in obesity risk, a 15% increase in T2D risk, an 8% increase in hypertension risk, and a 6% increase in all-cause mortality. Another study found that higher ASB consumption was associated with a 25% greater incidence of T2D before adjusting for adiposity. Additionally, ASB intake was associated with an increased risk of CVD and stroke.

Comparative Analysis of SSBs and ASBs

When comparing the health impacts of SSBs and ASBs, the evidence suggests that neither option is particularly healthy. A study found that both SSBs and ASBs were similarly associated with an increased risk of CVD. Another meta-analysis indicated that higher intakes of both SSBs and ASBs were significantly associated with a greater risk of developing cardiometabolic diseases and mortality. Moreover, ASBs were linked to increased cancer risk, particularly for aspartame and acesulfame-K.

 


Artificially sweetened foods and drinks are less healthy, than their sugary counterparts.

Cornelie Nienaber-Rousseau has answered Uncertain

An expert from North-West University in Nutrition

We have seen an explosive increase in food products containing non-caloric (non-nutritive) artificial sweeteners with sucralose, acesulfame potassium (acesulfame K) and aspartame being the most popular, probably becuase of the notoriousness of natural sugars (Yang, 2010). The FDA do rigorous safety testing on artificial sweeteners to ensure their safety at levels people would normally use. Apart from those with phenylkeonuria, for whom aspartame consumption is forbidden and intake thereof can have dire consequences (Butchko et al., 2002), all artificial sweeteners seems so be safe; but their long term effects might not be so favourable.

Even though sugar sweetened beverages and added sugars are notorious for their effects on weight gain, risk of metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes (Malik et al., 2010; Malik et al., 2013), epidemiological data found an association between non-caloric artificial sweetener use and weight gain as well. A systematic review that summarised the results of 18 large, epidemiologic studies indicated that consuming artifically-sweetened beverages was associated with weight gain in children (Brown et al., 2010), but these findings must further be supported by experimental studies.

Ebbeling et al. (2006) randomly assigned 103 adolescent to an intervention, wherein non-caloric beverages were used to displace sugar sweetened beverages, and a control group for 25 weeks. They found that body mass index did not decrease after substituting diet beverages for sugar-sweetened beverages, except among the heaviest participants. These findings raise serious questions regarding non-caloric artificial sweetener use, since it might be fueling rather than fighting weight gain and, therefore, the obesity epidemic (Fowler et al., 2008). In a mini-review Yang (2010) attempted to explain this phenomenon in the light of the neurobiology of food reward. Yang (2010) argue that artificial sweeteners do not activate the food reward pathways in the same way as natural sweeteners/sugars do. Furthermore, they activate the gustatory branch differently so that sucrose (natural sugar) compared to saccharin (non-nutritive sweetener) ingestion was associated with greater activation of the higher gustatory areas. Yang (2010) hypothesised that “sweetness decoupled from caloric content offers partial, but not complete, activation of the food reward pathways.” Yang (2010) also wrote that the activation of hedonic component may contribute to increased appetite, fuel food seeking behavior and encourage sugar cravings.

Non-caloric artificial sweetener seems to alter the gut microbiome (Suez et al., 2015). In mice consumption thereof could induce glucose intolerance.

Nutritive sweeteners such as sugar alcohols can have laxative effects, but are valuable in chewing gums and breath mints (Mäkinen, 2016). However, fructose (a natural sugar found in fruit) can also have similar effects.

Whether natural sugar is more/less healthy than artificial sweeteners and whehter reducing natural sugars by substituting with the non-nutritive versions need to be determined in large scale experimental studies with weight, type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome, microbiome as possible outcomes. From the current evidence, I would recommend to reduce the intake of both natural and artificial non-caloric sweeteners as part of a well-balanced nutritious diet and not merely replace natural sugars with artificial sweeteners.

 

Artificially sweetened foods and drinks are less healthy, than their sugary counterparts.

Rafael Franco has answered Unlikely

An expert from Universitat de Barcelona in Parkinson’s Disease, Alzheimer’s Disease, Antioxidants, Nutrition, Pharmacology, Asthma, Cell Biology, Biochemistry

With the current data and the experience of >60 years of life to keep an hydrated body is good. To take drinks with a bit of sugar drink with food is almost irrelevant, as to take sugar with the coffee.

To me the question is whether you need sugar between meals or not. I would think that it is not necessar. Actually it is not needed. Then sugar-containing drinks OK with meals (sugar content irrelevant) while sugar between meals would probably go a bit crazy your pancreas and its insulin production leading to a non necessary peak.

Exceptions? high-load work or very active children that may need food/energy more often to prevent ketoacidosis. In the case of children to eat too many sweets between meals is probably far from being good (one day OK but day after day….). Again children eating high loads of sweets between meals will make their pancreas go crazy.

 

Artificially sweetened foods and drinks are less healthy, than their sugary counterparts.

Gideon Meyerowitz-Katz has answered Extremely Unlikely

An expert from University of Wollongong in Epidemiology, Public Health, Diabetes

There is some debate over the effects of artificial sweeteners on health. Epidemiological studies tend to show that people who drink artificially sweetened drinks are a bit less healthy than people who don’t, and while these are not conclusive there have been quite a few of them showing an effect. However, interventional studies – where people are given either diet drinks or water – don’t seem to show a negative effect. The problem with the interventional studies is that they are often industry funded, so there may be some bias in their results. Overall, compared to water, there seems to be some evidence that artificial sweeteners are bad for you, but it’s not conclusive and might just be down to who is drinking these drinks.

But one thing we do know is that excess sugar intake is very bad for you. When we talk about artificial sweeteners being a problem, it’s inevitably in the framing of artificial sweeteners vs water. However, when you compare them to sugar, say Diet Coke vs Coke, they seem to be a bit better for your health. There’s also no evidence that artificial sweeteners cause cancer.

Overall, there may be some negative health effects from artificial sweeteners – although this is not certain – but they are still probably better than sugar for obesity and metabolic disease.

 

Artificially sweetened foods and drinks are less healthy, than their sugary counterparts.

Josh Mitteldorf has answered Likely

An expert from Washington University in St. Louis in Gerontology, Evolutionary Biology

There are no long-term studies of health effects from artificial sweeteners, but we know that there are some people for whom the short-term effects are damaging. Just in the last decade, we also know that most artificial sweeteners have a powerful effect stimulating insulin, which suggests that they may lead to Type 2 Diabetes. Since Type 2 Diabetes is the principal health risk from sugar, it’s a good guess that substituting artificial sweeteners is not beneficial. Many people unconsciously make up the calories that they avoided by substituting for sugar. Monkfruit and stevia may be no different in these regards. https://www.nature.com/articles/ijo2016225 I’d qualify this by saying that response varies greatly from person to person, and there are some people who rely on artificial sweeteners to help them lose weight. I would encourage anyone asking this question to do a personal experiment to see if artificial sweeteners are working for you. Two weeks on sugar, two weeks on sugar substitutes, Repeat two and two weeks. Monitor weight daily during those times, and look back afterward to see if there is a noticeable difference.

Have a question about science, health, fitness, or diet? Get cited, evidence-based insights: Consensus is an AI-Powered Academic Search Engine.

Try for free