Artificial Sweeteners & Insulin Response

[Guest guest]

I have not been able to find any research that clearly answers this

question. Any input would be appreciated.

Q: Do artificial sweeteners (aspartame, sucralose) provoke a blood

sugar response, and subsequent spike in insulin levels among healthy

(not diabetic) people?

A: I've read two sides the this story.

One side argues it does not matter whether the substance consumed has

or does not have any caloric value. As long as the tastebuds

perceive the substance to be sweet (even artifically), then there is

first a salivary response followed by a neurochemical reaction in the

body (blood sugar increase followed by insulin reaction and a drop in

blood sugar). Of course one wants to keep insulin levels as low as

possible (on an even keel of course) and consuming sweet foods may

keep a fairly high level of insulin circulating in the blood (which

contributes to maintining body fat by keeping the fat inaccessible

for use as an energy source).

The other side states that the reaction described above only happens

in the presence of carbohydrates (and, to a lesser extent, protein).

They say that non-caloric sweeteners do NOT provoke the insulin

response that occurs with sugary foods, and this group would include

fruit, thought to a lesser degree. The above positions assumes that

the non-caloric sweeteners are consumed in the absence of other carbs

and protein, e.g., a cup of decaf tea sweetened with sucralose. Zero

carbs; zero calories. But sweet.

The first group states that even such a benign drink as the decaf

tea/sucralose combination will provoke a rise in blood sugar,

followed by a measured insulin reaction because the body " senses "

that a sugar-like substance has been consumed (the sucralose 'tricks'

the body into reacting as if a sugary-drink has just been drunk).

And thus one will experience an insulin response, even in the absence

of calories and carbs.

The second group argues that their position is supported by the fact

that diabetics are able to tolerate artificially-sweetened foods as

opposed to their heavily-sugared counterparts. However, the first

group responds to this by stating that the only reason this happens

with diabetics is that the artificial sweetener significantly reduces

the TOTAL carbohydrate load and it is THAT reduction ONLY which

allows the diabetic to consume artificially-sweetened substances, not

the fact that the sugar itself is absent.

Does anyone know of peer-reviewed studies which validate either or

both of these views?

It seems to me a very easy theory to test. Take a large enough

sample size of healthy individuals (>= 20). Begin the tests with the

subjects in a fasting state. Using a double-blind test procedure (to

avoid the placebo effect), have the subjects consume a glass of

sweetened water. The sweetener will be either artificial or sugar-

based. After the appropriate length of time, measure the blood sugar

level.

It seems to me that this is all that is need to determine which

theory is correct (since in a healthy person, a rise in the blood

sugar will provoke an insulin response). If the first theory is

correct there should be similar blood sugar rises in both groups.

However, if the second theory is accurate, then there would only be a

blood sugar rise in the individuals who consumed the water/sugar

drink, not the water/artificial sweetener combo.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

~andy