News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021. Parent comment

Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by m463 on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @01:48AM (#38095006)
Note that some artificial sweeteners produce an insulin response like sugar - which leads to calories converted to fat.

Also, I wonder about fiber and other carbohydrates. Fiber moderates carbohydrates of all types and prevents glucose spikes (and crashes). and other processed carbs/starches can be very similar to simple sugars - breads, pasta, rice, potatoes, cereals, etc.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by hammock on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @02:07AM (#38095082)
Which artificial sweeteners?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by parineum on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @02:12AM (#38095116)
It's one of those truisms that has shotty science behind it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by reaperman on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @02:49AM (#38095292)
*shoddy, not shotty.

But yes[0], while metabolic pathways have been identified where artificial sweeteners certainly could cause insulin issues, RCT's have failed to find this effect expressed in vivo.

Artificial sweeteners do cause notable changes in gut biomes, and the effects of that are unknown.

0: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2020.59834...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by hgomersall on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @03:20AM (#38095451)
Right, but for the purposes here, it's probably enough to say that several artificial sweeteners are unexpectedly bioactive. As such they perhaps are doing things that are undesirable.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by hammock on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @01:46PM (#38101985)
Which artificial sweeteners?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by m463 on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @05:53PM (#38105853)
I believe sucralose

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8880058/

lots to sort through though:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7014832/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7547772/

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by financypants on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @01:59AM (#38095051)
Is this trend vastly affected by the rise of artificial sweeteners like aspartame?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by I_Nidhi on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @02:18AM (#38095139)
If it is, then I believe new sugar alternatives are in order since FDA released a warning against aspartame.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:U.S. Sugar consumption trend from 1970-2021 by xnx on Wednesday November 01, 2023 @04:38PM (#38104800)
Did a ctrl+f on this page to see if anyone had mentioned fiber. Absence of fiber is probably the key characteristic of "ultra" processed food. Foods with fiber are lower in calories, take longer to eat, increase satiety, and moderate glucose response. People are looking all over for scapegoats ("plastics!"), but fiber barely gets any attention.
[ Parent | on HN ]