Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Diabetes / July 2009
Artificial sweeteners linked to two fold increase in diabetes
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Susan - 24 Jun 2009 22:56 GMT This is association, not established causation.
Susan
Artificial Sweeteners Linked to Two-Fold Increase in Diabetes
People who use artificial sweeteners are heavier, more likely to have diabetes, and more likely to be insulin-resistant compared with nonusers. Results show an inverse association between obesity and diabetes, on one side, and daily total caloric, carbohydrate, and fat intake, on the other side, when comparing artificial sweetener users and control subjects.
The association may reflect the increased use of artificial sweeteners by obese and/or diabetic study participants. "This is a cross-section study, so there are limitations — we cannot say that artificial sweetener use causes obesity, we can say it is associated with it," stated first author Kristofer S. Gravenstein, a postbaccalaureate researcher with the Clinical Research Branch at the National Institute of Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health (NIH).
******Artificial sweeteners activate sweet taste receptors in enteroendocrine cells, leading to the release of incretin, which is known to contribute to glucose absorption. Recent epidemiologic studies in Circulation (2008;117:754-761) and Obesity (2008;16:1894-1900) showed an association between diet soda consumption and the development of obesity and metabolic syndrome.*****
This report tested whether participants in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA), which began in 1958, differ in anthropometric measures, daily caloric intake, and glucose status, separating them into three different groups: artificial sweetener users, artificial sweetener nonusers, or controls.
A total of 1,257 participants, with a mean age of 64.8 years (range, 21 - 96 years), had data on self-reported 7-day dietary intake, 2-hour oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), and anthropometric measures. The major artificial sweetener consumed was aspartame, preferred by 66% of BLSA participants, followed by saccharin (13%), sucralose (1.0%), and combinations of the three (21%).
"In our study, we were actually able to isolate what type of sweetener was used at a certain point in time, as we used food diaries, and not food questionnaires."
"When we first did this analysis, we found that people ate more fat before 1983, which is the year [of] a big increase in artificial sweetener consumption in the American population — it was actually when aspartame was approved and diet Coke was introduced," he explained.
******As a result, the study further analyzed data from a subset of participants, starting in 1983. Compared with 550 people who did not use artificial sweeteners, the 443 people who did were younger, heavier, and had a higher body mass index (BMI), yet they did not consume more calories from people who did not use artificial sweeteners. Fat, carbohydrate, protein, and total caloric intake were not different between the two groups (users vs nonusers).******
Furthermore, Mr. Gravenstein noted that people who used artificial sweeteners "were less likely to have a normal OGTT, or they were less likely to be diagnosed as having a normal glucose homeostasis."
In terms of glucose status (the impaired glucose tolerance (IGT), and/or impaired fasting glucose (IFG)) the data show that artificial sweetener users "were not different than the prediabetics, i.e., they had the same prevalence of prediabetes," he said, adding that "in our population, people who used artificial sweeteners were twice as likely to have diabetes, 8.8% compared to 4.4% for controls."
Analyzing the data further, the investigators focused on a subpopulation, in which fasting insulin values were available from 374 nonusers and 311 artificial sweetener users. The users had a higher fasting glucose levels, higher fasting insulin levels, and a higher measure of insulin resistance, as measured by the homeostasis model assessment, but glycosylated hemoglobin A1c levels were similar between the two groups.
The researchers suggest an alternative hypothesis, that artificial sweeteners modulate the metabolic rate through enteroendocrine cells, therefore contributing to the development of diabetes and/or obesity. However, this hypothesis needs further testing in longitudinal analysis and intervention studies, said the investigators.
"Also, it could be that artificial sweeteners are causing diabetes, or it could be that there is a higher use of them because a lot of physicians actually recommend people to use artificial sweeteners to prevent diabetes" Mr. Gravenstein said. The researchers are planning to address this question with a prospective analysis.
Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society: Abstract P2-478. Presented June 11, 2009
Bill who putters - 02 Jul 2009 19:54 GMT > x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society: Abstract > P2-478. Presented June 11, 2009 Saved and printed Susan.
Bill
 Signature Garden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA
http://www.youtube.com/usnationalarchives
Quentin Grady - 03 Jul 2009 06:50 GMT >The association may reflect the increased use of artificial sweeteners >by obese and/or diabetic study participants. "This is a cross-section [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >researcher with the Clinical Research Branch at the National Institute >of Aging (NIA), National Institutes of Health (NIH). In fact it makes more sense to suggest that people who are obese look towards artificial sweeteners to reduce their calorie intake.
 Signature Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Susan - 03 Jul 2009 15:56 GMT > In fact it makes more sense to suggest that people who are obese look > towards artificial sweeteners to reduce their calorie intake. Welcome back, Quentin!
I'm not sure I completely agree, but it's certainly not more than association yet.
I think it makes the most sense to measure hormonal and neurotransmitter responses to AS intake, along with increased or decreased caloric intake after using them vs. not using them.
Susan
Quentin Grady - 06 Jul 2009 03:05 GMT >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >I'm not sure I completely agree, but it's certainly not more than >association yet. Hi Susan,
It certainly is only association at the moment.
>I think it makes the most sense to measure hormonal and >neurotransmitter responses to AS intake, along with increased or >decreased caloric intake after using them vs. not using them. > >Susan Hi Susan,
I will settle for the simplest cause and effect for the moment. My hypothesis is, being obese encourages them to turn to artificial sweeteners in the hope they will reduce the calorie intake. Might not be right but it has the virtue of being simple.
regards,
 Signature Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Susan - 06 Jul 2009 03:09 GMT > I will settle for the simplest cause and effect for the moment. > My hypothesis is, being obese encourages them to turn to artificial > sweeteners in the hope they will reduce the calorie intake. Might not > be right but it has the virtue of being simple. But it's not as easily tested using objective measures.
So while I agree that obese folks may use AS more, that isn't necessarily the simplest explanation. Certainly not the simplest to test. :-)
So good to be debating with you on ASD again! ;-)
Susan
Cheri - 03 Jul 2009 17:39 GMT >>The association may reflect the increased use of artificial sweeteners >>by obese and/or diabetic study participants. "This is a cross-section [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > In fact it makes more sense to suggest that people who are obese look > towards artificial sweeteners to reduce their calorie intake. Yep...as we have all noticed, the large order of fast food, with a diet soda. It's better than the sugared soda though, since that just adds more calories to an already calorie laden order, which if using regular soda could account for more pounds gained over time. I never was a big soda drinker at all, but I do prefer the taste of diet soda over regular soda when I have one.
Cheri
Peppermint Patootie - 04 Jul 2009 03:09 GMT > >>The association may reflect the increased use of artificial sweeteners > >>by obese and/or diabetic study participants. "This is a cross-section [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Cheri Why do you assume "obese" people eat a "large order of fast food?"
PP
Tiger Lily - 04 Jul 2009 04:52 GMT much snipped.........
> Why do you assume "obese" people eat a "large order of fast food?" as a person who hasn't had 'fast food' as a rule (ok, once or twice a year, i have a Peter's Hamburger, with only the bottom bun) and i subsequently went from 125/135 lbs and gained 100 lbs over 3 years due to untreated hypothyroid.............. i'm curious about this too
oddly enough, the people i have met at 'fast food' joints are skinny folk who don't have to count/care (ok, maybe 0.5% are overweight, but not the majority that i've seen)
kate
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD - 04 Jul 2009 10:07 GMT Kate wrote:
> much snipped......... > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > subsequently went from 125/135 lbs and gained 100 lbs over 3 years due > to untreated hypothyroid.............. i'm curious about this too Would suggest you have your doctor(s) supervise your using the diabetic 2PD-OMER Approach:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/9642aafa0aad16eb?
> oddly enough, the people i have met at 'fast food' joints are skinny > folk who don't have to count/care (ok, maybe 0.5% are overweight, but > not the majority that i've seen) There is the false belief that "fast food" causes obesity so that obese people are avoiding "fast food" restaurants while lean people who think they need to gain weight become regulars.
What is causing obesity continues to be the "hunger is starvation" delusion.
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/74281ab7d7ce78de?
Kate, can you publicly say "Jesus is LORD" ?
Love in the truth,
Andrew <>< -- Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD Board-certified Heart Doctor and Author of "Trust the Truth:" http://T3WiJ.com
"... no one can say 'Jesus is LORD' except by the Holy Spirit." (1 Cor 12:3) http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/035c93540862751c?
What are the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven? http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/980b41e6999de315?
Only the truth can cure the "hunger is starvation" delusion: http://groups.google.com/group/sci.med.cardiology/msg/74281ab7d7ce78de?
Schlomo Frankenstein - 05 Jul 2009 01:36 GMT > Kate wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Would suggest you have your doctor(s) supervise your using the > diabetic 2PD-OMER Approach: Would suggest you stop lying and stop worshipping Satan.
Andrew Chung:
Is a frequent and proven liar (evidence archived forever on Google)
Has lost numerous NNTP accounts with supernews and others, has had many Google accounts nuked, and his vanity domain heartmdphd.com is now banned from setting up accounts. He is instead using multiple Google sock accounts and email addresses in the format lo...@thetruth.com (# being a number)
Is unemployed after being sacked with cause from his one and only job after just over 80 days
Fled the state of Florida, and now claims to practice in Georgia despite having no admission priveliges in the State's hospitals
Runs a phony foundation with a total declared income of circa $200, the ownership and contact details of which are obfuscated on its website
Makes failed prophecies concerning earthquakes with areas and dates, which don't happen (remember the bible quotes about false prophets)
Performed a public attempt at 'exorcising' a Malaysian sock on usenet, then denied doing it. He has recently reversed position again and admits to practicing exorcism by usenet, proving himself a liar in the process.
Promotes a dangerous diet, with a million dollar guarantee that he demands thirty dollars to access details of. This despite being unemployed. His soliciting and spamming for donations looks to be similar to the Nigerian Advance Fee Fraud, where victims pay money upfront in the hope of coming into riches but find they have merely bought into a lie. Part of his advice is to pour nail polish remover onto food.
Declares he has a cardiology practice despite posting night and day from the same IP address (his home presumably) or a coffee shop internet cafe
Makes further false prophecies that we should now be all dying in a bird flu pandemic. When these fail to happen, he does them all over again and changes the dates. Nuclear war is another Chung spciality, which naturally doesn't happen when he says it is going to.
Worships evil hatemonger Fred Phelps and will not denounce the acts of Westboro's congregation. He even accuses someone with the name Phelps of being Fred's son and refuses to accept he is completely wrong.
Uses the same patter as Pat Robertson, indicating his religious activity is confined to watching cable TV. No evidence Chung has ever attended a church.
Has a tendency to cyberstalk, particularly women. His wife fled some time ago to another state, an act which Chung tries to pass off as "being on vacation".
Frequently passes himself off as being qualified in areas such as endocrinology, despite making incredibly fundamental blunders in his 'advice'. It is no wonder the Florida heart facility terminated him, and has publicly denounced his version of events. Again archived on Google.
Don't forget the fake fast, where he didn't lose any weight, as well as the infamous 666 stamping fiasco. His latest vile trick is spamming the blogs of dying cancer patients and then crowing triumphantly when they pass away.
Tiger Lily - 05 Jul 2009 05:07 GMT >> Kate wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >> Would suggest you have your doctor(s) supervise your using the >> diabetic 2PD-OMER Approach: Chung's posts are deleted by my news server
what would you suggest i do, Andie??? oh, wait, you ASSumed that i didn't finally get treatment for hypothyroid??? do you know the difference that makes??? i'm 5'6" tall, and i wear a size 10 (with a belt to hold my jeans up as they are falling off me again)
but thank you for thinking of me, yet again, a.shole!
Quentin Grady - 06 Jul 2009 03:10 GMT >Yep...as we have all noticed, the large order of fast food, with a diet >soda. It's better than the sugared soda though, since that just adds more [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >Cheri Good point Cheri,
They view the sugared soda as empty calories whereas the fast food isn't viewed this way.
 Signature Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Tiger Lily - 04 Jul 2009 04:48 GMT >> The association may reflect the increased use of artificial sweeteners >> by obese and/or diabetic study participants. "This is a cross-section [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > In fact it makes more sense to suggest that people who are obese look > towards artificial sweeteners to reduce their calorie intake. exactly, Quentin!
my SIL has all of her children in the 'normal' range for BMI what changed? no more 'full bore' soft drinks, everything 'diet' from then on
kate
Quentin Grady - 06 Jul 2009 03:17 GMT >exactly, Quentin! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >kate hi Kate Agreed. At close to a dozen teaspoons of sugar or its equivalent of high fructose corn syrup switching to artificial sweeteners make sense.
 Signature Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
Alan S - 16 Jul 2009 06:16 GMT >This is association, not established causation. I posted these two photos on flickr a while back when a similar "correlation" study appeared.
Lunch for my young Egyptian guide in Giza; note the main course and the drink (Coke "Light" is diet coke by another name) http://www.flickr.com/photos/alan_s/3554989779/in/photostream/
Another view of my guide: http://www.flickr.com/photos/alan_s/3555803896/in/photostream/
Form your own opinion on the difference between causation and correlation for the diet coke.
Susan - 16 Jul 2009 18:30 GMT >> This is association, not established causation. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Form your own opinion on the difference between causation and > correlation for the diet coke. Alan, that's too simplistic. While I believe that diet Coke may be a marker for habits, not causation, I also know that digestion/metabolism begins in the mouth and that there has been research demonstrating insulin responses in *some* to the sensation of sweetness.
It'd be so much more useful if instead of choosing up sides and taking stances, we could all consider all possibilities.
Susan
Cheri - 16 Jul 2009 18:43 GMT > It'd be so much more useful if instead of choosing up sides and taking > stances, we could all consider all possibilities. > > Susan But, why would we want to do that when it's so much easier not to? ;-)
Cheri
Alan S - 17 Jul 2009 00:24 GMT >x-no-archive: yes > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >Susan I realise it is simplistic and I am well aware of those studies.
However, simplistic or not I believe it is a valid commentary on the multitude of recent studies which do not take into account the inter-related factors such as the foods eaten together with the one being studied.
That photo is an example of many other times I have witnessed the equivalent occurring in fast food restaurants all over the world but especially in my country and yours. How many times a day do you see the person who makes a token gesture to dietary modification? Whether it is to use diet sodas in lieu of sugared sodas while ordering the Big Mac and fries; or to abstain from sugar in their tea or coffee while munching on a large slice of pie or mud cake; or to eat just one enormous meal each day without breakfast or snacks; or any similar skewed method.
Too many studies attempt to analyse single components of the menu or lifestyle without noting the confounders, or without accepting that menus sometimes cannot be dissected like that. Even the basics, like fat, protein and carbs, are inextricably linked because excesses or deficiencies in one macronutrient can have different effects depending on the proportions of other macronutrients. Thus excessive fat can have a different effect in the presence of excessive carbs to inadequate carbs and so on.
My stance, if I have one, is in the "just right" camp. Of course, the problem is defining that.
Getting back to diet cokes, I have yet to see a credible study showing any problems with use of apartame or other artificial sweeteners in moderation for people who are not actually allergic to them. Balancing that there are plenty of studies showing the ill effects of adding a few 12oz glasses of regular soda to the daily menu.
Quentin Grady - 16 Jul 2009 21:21 GMT >>This is association, not established causation. > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >Form your own opinion on the difference between causation and >correlation for the diet coke. LOL.
Hi Alan
Lovely teaching by illustration. Gets the message home beautifully.
Coke is popular in countries where alcohol is forbidden. Traditionally mint flavoured tea was popular but coke has become the popular replacement. Dylmar have produced a Moroccan tea with the mint and green tea already blended. Very nice in hot weather.
Kind regards,
 Signature Quentin Grady ^ ^ / New Zealand, >#,#< [ / \ /\ "... and the blind dog was leading."
http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/quentin
|
|
|