Nutrition Science and Everyday Application - beta v 0.1

SUGAR SUBSTITUTES 243
ARE NATURAL SWEETENERS BETTER THAN ARTIFICIAL ONES?
Sweeteners made from the stevia plant and from monk fruit extracts are both derived from
plants and so are considered more natural than the other choices. However, it’s important
to not confuse natural with safe. Remember that many things in nature are dangerous, even
deadly. (Consider cyanide, poisonous mushrooms, and botulinum toxin, for example.) Stevia
sweeteners, which are growing in popularity and are often marketed as a more natural
alternative, are made through a highly industrial extraction process, and some are produced
by genetically-modified yeast. None of that makes them inherently less safe, but it does
highlight that they aren’t exactly natural.
Figure 4.42. A box of Sweetleaf sweetener, marketed as “Natural Stevia Sweetener.”
What’s important is how well these products are tested and studied for their safety. The
Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy nonprofit organization, has
criticized the FDA for not requiring more testing of stevia and monk fruit extracts, although
they recommend stevia as one of the safer options for sugar substitutes based on existing
data. However, recent research has shown that, like artificial sweeteners, stevia also affects
the growth of gut bacteria.
WHAT’S THE BOTTOM LINE?
Sugar substitutes can add sweetness to a food without the calories, and they aren’t
associated with tooth decay. Despite concerns over the years, they probably don’t cause
cancer. However, they may not help with weight loss or maintenance in the long-term, and
recent research shows that they may alter the gut microbiota and metabolic health.
Self-Check: