Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 137 posts

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#21

Post by vezycash »

nervousvarun wrote: post #10
pieter_mj wrote: post #3

Currently a perfect diabetes, obesitas (and also cancer & alzheimer's) storm is brewing. My gut instinct (pun intended) tells me it mainly has dietary causes which are not limited to increased portions alone.

Processed foods + sedentary lifestyles = perfect storm. Pretty obvious "something" happened in the 70s and we've been on this ride ever since: https://nchspressroom.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/obesity.gi...

If someone is sick, they'll become slow. All they'll want to do is lie down some place quiet.

Watch kids, healthy kids. After a meal, all they want to do is run, talk, jump - move. Sitting still is the last thing they want to do.

My point is perhaps, sedentary behavior is caused by something, a symptom outside the control of those afflicted by it.

Here are some culprits we could explore:

Schooling: Being trained, forced to sit in a spot for hours could train people to be sedentary.

Processed food: Maybe its doing something to the body. Like how zombie ants are controlled by fungi.

Aging process: All animals become less active with age... Even snails.

Environment: Tech makes it harder to be active physically. A tv remote, car, internet for shopping...

Poverty: There's a proven link between experiencing poverty at a young age and inability to control food intake, and spend responsibly.

Genes: People used to bulk up for winter hunger. Now there's food all year round. But the lizard brain is still in control.

There might be more reasons why people binge eat, and remain sedentary such as processed water, poor air quality, domestication (The more Wolf gene a Dog has, the more active it is)...

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#22

Post by jaxtellerSoA »

raisedbyninjas wrote: post #11

There are only 12 milligrams of sucralose in a packet of Splenda. So the toxic levels found in mice had the same concentration as an 8 oz. cup of coffee with 16 packets of Splenda.

>an 8 oz. cup of coffee with 16 packets of Splenda.

I have literally seen people do such things at Dunkin Donuts. "Yeah can I get a medium coffee with extra cream and 20 sugars." You WUT M8?

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#23

Post by bunderbunder »

raisedbyninjas wrote: post #11

There are only 12 milligrams of sucralose in a packet of Splenda. So the toxic levels found in mice had the same concentration as an 8 oz. cup of coffee with 16 packets of Splenda.

Or, alternatively, 4-ish cans of Pepsi One.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#24

Post by bb101 »

unstuckdev wrote: post #20
nervousvarun wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Processed foods + sedentary lifestyles = perfect storm. Pretty obvious "something" happened in the 70s and we've been on this ride ever since: https://nchspressroom.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/obesity.gi...

Realizing one 2 tablespoon serving of peanut butter was half a full meal was a wakeup call. It turns out 1/4 or less of a "serving" of most processed things works the same taste-wise and doesn't lead to insatiable hunger later.

Interestingly, peanut butter is near the bottom of the scale for being insulinogenic (the food insulin index). That means it's less likely to be put away as fat according to The Personalized Diet by Drs Segal and Elinav [1]

[1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/1478918802

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#25

Post by qwerty456127 »

The article doesn't say which sweeteners did they study and this is a very bad style. Fortunately it links to an article on EurekAlert which in its turn links to the actual scientific paper (doi.org/10.3390/molecules23102454). It says aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k (ace-k) (BTW at least saccharine and ace-k are already known to be carcinogenic AFAIK) were tested against Escherichia Coli (I would rather be interested in testing them against Lactobacillaceae).

Lactulose is a great prebiotic (not widely known infortunately) very good for gut bacteria (AFAIK), has geroprotective properties, is a mild osmotic laxative, has zero calories, doesn't affect blood sugar/insulin and tastes great. I use it instead of maple syrup. As far as I also know erythritol (looks, feels and cooks almost exactly like sugar) and palatinose (same, but has calories yet doesn't kick insulin and doesn't feed mouth bacteria so is safe for teeth) are good for gut bacteria too. We could also mention inulin (which is a well-known prebiotic very beneficial for gut microbiome) but it's sweetness is weaker.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#26

Post by bunderbunder »

vezycash wrote: post #6
pieter_mj wrote: post #3

Currently a perfect diabetes, obesitas (and also cancer & alzheimer's) storm is brewing. My gut instinct (pun intended) tells me it mainly has dietary causes which are not limited to increased portions alone.

Some books I've read say increased portions are a symptom of something else. E.g. Inability to feel satisfied.

So, tying it back to artificial sweeteners, there's a fair bit of research to suggest that consuming them causes you to feel more hungry.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#27

Post by datavirtue »

pieter_mj wrote: post #3

Currently a perfect diabetes, obesitas (and also cancer & alzheimer's) storm is brewing. My gut instinct (pun intended) tells me it mainly has dietary causes which are not limited to increased portions alone.

Already been proven. The problem now is getting the government to change thier food recommendations based on the findings. The fight has been going on since the 1970s. We are talking about a fundamental change to society here.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#28

Post by unstuckdev »

bb101 wrote: post #24
unstuckdev wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Realizing one 2 tablespoon serving of peanut butter was half a full meal was a wakeup call. It turns out 1/4 or less of a "serving" of most processed things works the same taste-wise and doesn't lead to insatiable hunger later.

Interestingly, peanut butter is near the bottom of the scale for being insulinogenic (the food insulin index). That means it's less likely to be put away as fat according to The Personalized Diet by Drs Segal and Elinav [1] [1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/1478918802

Does this factor in the added sugar in most peanut butters? I can't find any without it around here.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#29

Post by searine »

Sileni wrote: post #19
searine wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. Most of that white powder in a sugar packet is dextrose filler.

Someone made a chemistry joke that went over your head. Dextrose is sugar. Common in corn syrup, to be exact.

Yes, but the volume is higher than granular sugar. It's a "bulking agent" to give the sweetener a pleasing volume.

Re: Study: Artificial sweeteners toxic to digestive gut bacteria

#30

Post by anothergoogler »

bunderbunder wrote: post #23
raisedbyninjas wrote: post #11

There are only 12 milligrams of sucralose in a packet of Splenda. So the toxic levels found in mice had the same concentration as an 8 oz. cup of coffee with 16 packets of Splenda.

Or, alternatively, 4-ish cans of Pepsi One.

Why four cans? The concentration doesn't increase with volume.
Post reply on HN