Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper

The Spokesman-Review Newspaper The Spokesman-Review

Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883
Partly Cloudy Day 71° Partly Cloudy

Ask the Doctors 12/22

By Eve Glazier, M.D., and Elizabeth Ko, M.D. Andrews McMeel Syndication

Dear Doctor: What are the possible health risks from artificial sweeteners?

Dear Reader: It’s been more than a century since a scientist at Johns Hopkins University who was fiddling around with the byproducts of coal tar (that’s right, coal tar) accidentally discovered saccharine. It caused a sensation, and a decade later saccharine, which scientists estimate to be between 200 and 700 times sweeter than table sugar, could be found in many sodas and some canned foods.

Since then, as you noted, a host of new artificial sweeteners have hit the market. Some, like cyclamates, which were linked to bladder cancer in lab rats, were subsequently withdrawn. Others, despite undergoing rigorous study before getting approval from the Food and Drug Administration, continue to be the focus of skepticism and scrutiny.

At this time, six artificial sweeteners – also known as “non-nutritive” and “high-intensity” sweeteners – have received FDA approval. These are saccharine, sucralose, aspartame, acesulfame potassium, neotame and advantame. Each is at least several hundred times sweeter than sugar. Advantame is said to be 20,000 times sweeter than sugar. It, along with all the other FDA-approved artificial sweeteners except saccharine and aspartame, is heat-stable. That means these can be used in baking.

Stevia, a sweetener made from the leaf extract of a plant native to parts of South America, gets a Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) nod from the FDA. That means it doesn’t need formal approval for use. However, the stevia leaf itself, as well as crude stevia extracts, are not cleared for use at this time.

Artificial sweeteners have undergone years of testing in order to get approval from the FDA, which means they are considered safe for human consumption. Sucralose, for instance, was studied for 20 years before getting FDA approval. However, as we mentioned before and as your letter illustrates, not everyone feels comfortable with these products.

Some subsequent studies linked various artificial sweeteners to health problems in the rats and mice used in experiments. But when this research underwent scrutiny by groups such as the National Cancer Institute, it was determined that the data too inconsistent to draw conclusions.

A fascinating group of studies has suggested that, contrary to their no-calorie logic, artificial sweeteners don’t help with weight loss. In fact, the promise of sweetness without the caloric payoff actually backfires. It sets off a chemical reaction in the brain that results in increased craving for sweets. And because seemingly every discussion of health and well-being these days now leads to the gut, there is evidence that artificial sweeteners can adversely affect the numbers and diversity of the friendly bacteria in our intestines.

While artificial sweeteners can be a boon to people with conditions like diabetes, we believe that for the rest of us, they should be rarely used.

Send your questions to

The Spokesman-Review Newspaper

Local journalism is essential.

Give directly to The Spokesman-Review's Northwest Passages community forums series -- which helps to offset the costs of several reporter and editor positions at the newspaper -- by using the easy options below. Gifts processed in this system are not tax deductible, but are predominately used to help meet the local financial requirements needed to receive national matching-grant funds.

Active Person

Subscribe to the Spokane7 email newsletter

Get the day’s top entertainment headlines delivered to your inbox every morning.