Nutrition and Fitness Professional, LLC

Weight Loss Counseling, Vegetarian, Vegan, & Sports Nutrition, plus Fitness Training Services and Body Fat Assessments

Archive for September, 2014

Saccharin Human Trial: Artificial Sweeteners News Part 2

Sep 26

Posted by Joey Gochnour, BS, BS, MEd, RDN, CSSD, CSOWM, LD, NASM-CPT in Personal Experiences and Opinions, Science Analysis | No Comments

Last week I discussed why you shouldn’t freak out about the latest news about artificial sweeteners.  This week, I will give a bit more information on the study, now that I have obtained a full-text copy of it from professional resources.  Specifically, I will let you how much the humans were consuming and real food recommendations you can take from this study, as yes, there are some take-home messages for some of the population, particularly diet soda/pop drinkers, and not as much for those who use packets of artificial sweetener.

Before I get started, I would like to link to this post in theguardian.com about how journals like Nature, Cell, and Science are damaging science due to incentives.  I agree with a lot of what this writer says.  Back to my post.

According to the human trial in this study, the only sweetener tested was saccharin, which is sold as Sweet N Low (the pink packets).  Thus, everything I say will apply only to saccharin.  The science doesn’t speak strongly for other sweeteners at this time because they were mice experiments.  Similar pathways and mechanisms for glucose intolerance based on species of microbiota present in mice can be surmised, but it is only preliminary and cannot be assumed the same happens for all human populations.

Before we go into specifics, the humans studied were not well-controlled based on the paper description. There is not a mention of the type of humans other than that they were “seven healthy volunteers (5 males and 2 females, aged 28-36) who do not normally consume NAS or NAS-containing foods for 1 week.”  NAS means non-caloric artificial sweeteners (more on researchers writing in code in another blog post…).  We don’t know anything about these humans’ weights, heights, race, diet, exercise habits, stress, family history of diabetes, etc.  That’s a lot of information to not have about these subjects.

The humans were given the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) maximum acceptable daily intake of commercial saccharin of 5 mg per kilogram body weight in three divided daily doses equivalent to 120 mg, totaling 360 mg a day.  They were monitored by continuous glucose measurements and daily glucose tolerance tests (GTT).  Doing some math, this is the maximum dose allowed for someone who is about 158 lbs.  There was no mention of the individual humans’ weights.  A glucose tolerance test is when someone ingests 75 g of glucose (which is about five 8″ tortillas or two cans of Coke, if Coke was pure glucose and not fructose, in 5 minutes time) and researchers measure blood glucose at regular intervals afterwards for three hours.

I would think that just taking a glucose tolerance test every day for 6 days would have an effect on glucose tolerance, but they were also consuming the maximum “safe” amount of saccharin on top of it.  There were four participants who experienced glucose intolerance, and the researchers noted that their gut bacteria had higher counts of Bacteroides fragilis, Weissella cibaria, and Candidatus Arthromitus.

To get the same amount of saccharin (360 mg) a day the subjects had, you would have to consume 10 packets of Sweet N Low per day, since each packet has 36 mg of saccharin.  So unless you are using that many Sweet N Low packets a day, I wouldn’t worry about this study.

The only diet soda I know that still uses saccharin is called Tab, produced by The Coca-Cola Company, with 96 mg of saccharin per 12 fluid ounce can.  The FDA also sets a limit of 12 mg saccharin per fluid ounce.  So unless you drink 4 of these 12 fluid ounce cans per day, as well as eat large amounts of pure glucose sugar along side it equivalent to a glucose tolerance test without any other food to slow down that glucose absorption (such protein and fat found in whole foods), I wouldn’t worry about artificial sweeteners yet.

What’s your take on this study?  Do you disagree with my conclusions?  Did I miss something?  Please comment and share.

 



Share on FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Tags: , , , , , ,

Stop Freaking Out About Artificial Sweeteners

Sep 18

Posted by Joey Gochnour, BS, BS, MEd, RDN, CSSD, CSOWM, LD, NASM-CPT in Personal Experiences and Opinions, Science Analysis | No Comments

Edit 9/25/14: I have received a full-text copy of the study and made a follow-up blog post to this one on the human intervention part of this study as well as quantified the amounts of saccharin you must eat to experience the effects the humans achieved in the study.

One of this week’s catchy nutrition-related headlines is “Artificial sweeteners could cause spikes in blood sugar.”  Rant ON…

The real scientific article published in Nature says “Artificial sweeteners induce glucose intolerance by altering the gut microbiota,” and if you read the article abstract, which is all the public has access to unless you pay for the article or are at an academic or professional institution that has access to the article, you will see that the experiment was done on MICE.  They demonstrated that feeding MICE artificial sweeteners changes MOUSE gut bacteria, transplanted the gut bacteria into a germ free MOUSE, and then those MICE also had the same metabolic profile as the MICE eating whatever concentration of artificial sweeteners they were fed.

These studies have already been conducted, i.e. studies that show the gut microflora has an impact on your body chemistry, in other studies with mice fecal transplantation. There are also case studies of humans with bowel inflammation being cured at high rates with fecal transplantation from healthy individuals.

What this article does NOT show is that humans who consume artificial sweeteners, likely in amounts that don’t quite reach that which mice were fed (but who can say, since the public doesn’t have access to the article without paying), are likely to experience the same metabolic derangements.  Yes, humans may have some of the same metabolic pathways that could be affected by the bacteria, but the study did NOT show that humans who eat artificial sweeteners WILL GET spikes in blood sugar or experience glucose intolerance.

Glucose intolerance is affected by quite a number of other factors, not just artificial sweeteners, such as inactivity and overall caloric content and macronutrient distributation (carbs/fat/protein) of that diet.  The idea that a small amount of artificial sweetener is a game breaker for humans is highly unlikely.

I chew gum with artificial sweetener daily because it keeps my breath fresh when working with clients and lacks real sugar, which feeds oral bacteria that may promote cavities in humans.  Some days I might have 4 pieces of gum.  I don’t have glucose intolerance OR cavities.  Far from it.  I’m very physically active and eat a balanced diet to match my caloric expenditure.  Unless artificial sweeteners represent a significant portion by weight of food you are eating, I would not give these headlines any more credence.

These headlines are more likely to hurt those who exhibit obsessive-compulsive tendencies to avoid anything at all possible that MIGHT be considered bad (colloquially termed orthorexia).  Articles like these cause undo anxiety for these people who don’t know who to believe so just dot all their i’s and cross all their t’s when it comes to nutrition, regardless of the strength of the science and the source of the information.

Rant OFF.  Please comment and share.



Share on FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Tags: , , , , , ,

Why Fat Shaming Must Stop if America is Going to Lose Weight

Sep 16

Posted by Joey Gochnour, BS, BS, MEd, RDN, CSSD, CSOWM, LD, NASM-CPT in Diet or Exercise?, Personal Experiences and Opinions | No Comments

A study posted on Medline this past week about fat shaming not motivating people to lose weight, possibly even causing more weight gain is the impetus for this blog post.

People who are overweight and obese are intimately aware of their body type.  Telling people that they are overweight or obese adds insult to injury.  I can definitely relate to not being in control of what’s going on in life in quite a few ways, but one of the ways I’ll share here in a blog post, as I realize I’m posting on the internet for everyone to see, so we’ll start with how I look.  Maybe another day I’ll disclose other more personal ways I’ve not been in control of my life in the past.

When I was balding in at age 22, people would tell me I was balding.  Guess how that made me feel?  Sad.  Scared.  Worse.  Angry at family genes.  I had different coping mechanisms than many people adapt, as I didn’t become an alcoholic or get on drugs.  Since then, I’ve come to terms with being bald and owned it.

I went through stages of feeling embarrassed, wearing hats, growing my hair out, shaving it off, growing it out again, trying Propecia, stopping Propecia because of side effects, trying a different style, shaving it off again, wearing hats, and then just stopped caring.  It took me half of my twenties to come to terms with what the gene pool dealt me, especially when you want to date in your twenties.  There’s really no cure for baldness because there’s nothing wrong with being bald physically.  I am accepting of it now and am a stronger person from having dealt with that already in my life.

Back to obesity.  People who are overweight or obese know that they are overweight or obese.  They may or may not have tried multiple diets already, obsessively weighed themselves, thrown the scale out, bought another scale, hired a personal trainer who beat them into the ground, still didn’t lose weight (because physical activity doesn’t actually help with the parameter of weight loss itself), etc.  It’s a sensitive subject.  Clearly, telling people that they are overweight doesn’t help.

Now let’s talk about a darker issue that judgmental people who fat shame may not be aware of.  How did obese people get obese?  How did overweight people get to where they are now?  Have you ever sat down and got to know someone who is overweight or obese?  For many people a few extra pounds is not what I’m talking about.  I’m talking you’re 50+ pounds overweight and it’s still going up.  You’re out of control of your life.  It’s not as simple as saying “stop eating, and eat more fruits and vegetables,” which is what many people think I do for a living–if only it were so easy.

It’s not as simple as telling people to go exercise more, while I, as the trainer-dietitian, am silently judged by others while working with an overweight/obese person for not pushing them during a personal training session and instead spending time by sitting down and talking.  If you read to the end of this, you’ll understand why I, as a trainer-dietitian, am talking instead of acting as a drill sergeant for a workout.

Our society is not one that is forthcoming with sharing vulnerable emotions, and different people have different ways of coping.  If you’re feeling rock bottom depressed, so anxious you can’t sleep, or so mad you think you’re going to bust a blood vessel in your head and have your eyes turn black Dark Willow style, many people have not been taught how to deal with these emotions.

Many people do not want to feel these emotions anymore, having felt them for enough time in their lives.  Some people have been taught to hide their emotions all life.  This is not uncommon in societies that promote an overly masculine male ideal, in cases of emotional abuse where a child was told they were not allowed to feel emotions they were having, or had to curtail their emotions for the sake of another, among MANY other reasons.

Some people will abuse alcohol to not feel emotions, which as common as alcoholism is, this is not uncommon.  Some people will engage in legal and illegal drug abuse.  Some people will get “addicted” to video games as an escape.  Some people will abuse sex and become “sex addicts.”  Whatever their poison is, they all lead to escaping painful emotions and become habit.

Others are able to reach out to others in a healthy way and share emotions in a supportive environment, but this is not as common for a number of reasons, including lack of supportive environments, a person is far enough gone that they are unable to perceive that such environments exist, or they have never had the experience in life of a supportive environment and were never educated on the benefits of one.  If you’ve made it this far in this post, you’ll see that overweight/obesity can be pretty dark subjects.

Let’s look at compulsive overeating and binge eating.  Did you know that carbohydrates, in particular, can play a role in brain chemistry?  They can alter the dopamine/serotonin ratio in the brain.  Excessive carbohydrate eating can produce a calming feeling, which results from increases in serotonin.  This is exactly what someone who is feeling uncomfortable emotions needs: a calming feeling.

The overeating solves that problem, since society did not solve it for them.  Society failed to provide them that comfort.  They feel calm and comfortable again…temporarily with the carbohydrate overeating.  Unfortunately, food has calories, which lead to weight gain if eaten in excess of what the body physically needs (not emotionally needs).

Add insult to injury, people shame people who overeat instead of figuring out what is going on with the person.  This can lead to even more overeating in a feedback cycle.  Additionally, people who overeat can get into the habit of using food for comfort.  Now, the very thing that gives them comfort is shamed, and they often shame themselves for using food as comfort even when others may not overtly.

The morale of this story is this: overeating is not a logical process.  It is more an emotional process.  People who are overweight or obese KNOW this and aren’t stupid.  They especially will not be wanting to share a vulnerable aspect of their lives with you after you demonstrated that it is unsafe for them to do so.

Overweight and obesity are our problem as a society as well as an individual’s problem, so rather than turn up your nose and shame the person, I encourage you to reach out and connect with them.  We shouldn’t have needed a scientific study to tell us this.  Overweight/obese shaming is one of the last socially acceptable ways to discriminate, and this must stop.

Please comment and share!



Share on FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Tags: , , ,

Supplement Adulteration and Gut Immunity Health Stance

Sep 4

Posted by Joey Gochnour, BS, BS, MEd, RDN, CSSD, CSOWM, LD, NASM-CPT in Media Quotes, Personal Experiences and Opinions, Science Analysis | 1 Comment

I recently answered a media query for health professionals on the best ways to improve your immune system.  I was NOT made aware that I would be put on a supplement website.  If you know me, I’m NOT a big fan of MOST supplements.  I received no form of remuneration other than my website being posted on their website.  Between 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 supplements in the US are adulterated.  This means they:

  1. Don’t have what they say they have on the label
  2. Don’t have any active ingredients they say they have
  3. Have other active ingredients that can be dangerous.  Some sports supplements contain steroids and STRONG stimulants, which can result in a collegiate athlete having a positive drug test and losing eligibility…and/or die from the stimulant and/or get the negatives of steroids.
  4. Are not guaranteed to have the amount of the ingredient stated on the label
  5. Could be pure white sand (silicon dioxide) when you thought you were getting creatine or probiotics.  That’s some expensive sand that went in one end and out the other!

Supplements are not regulated until someone experiences an adverse effect AND reports it.  It is the responsibility of the manufacturer selling you the supplement to ensure quality control.  This is completely laughable that this is allowed, but the alternative is using taxpayer money to increase government bloat programs on an elusive market as it is, since these companies come and go fast.  Some third parties will certify supplements, including NSF and ConsumerLab.  If you think I’m making up these statistics, I invite you to do your own research at ConsumerLab!

The panel of health experts has 85% good advice for promoting immunity, if you would like to check out the quote.  Those that I do not agree with include those who recommend probiotics for everyone.  As you see, registered dietitians are not in agreement on this.  I don’t understand how gut bacteria in a capsule that are supposed to survive in an alkaline environment in the large intestine can make it past the extreme acidic environment of the stomach alive and set up camp lower down the tract where they promote immunity.  Unless they’re using special capsule technology, the bacteria in these capsules probably die before they do any good.

The bacteria would also have to compete with existing microorganisms in your colon, which have already set up camp based on your diet, exercise, stress levels, etc.  You would have to continually consume these capsules to compete against the bacteria down there that your current diet supports.  The bacteria are called the gut flora, gut microbiota, microflora.  Did you know there’s a 90% cure rate for irritible bowel syndromes with fecal transplantation?  Just get over the ick factor.

I think it is MUCH more important to consume a variety of different types of indigestible carbohydrates, ie fiber, as these are considered “prebiotics,” which is what the bacteria ferment.  You would get these from eating a variety of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains (the food components in our diet with fiber).  Try to eat various colors and textures of vegetables.  I am not in the school of thought that everyone needs to take a probiotic.  There may be some cases where it could possibly help, but I think it is secondary to the big picture of consumption of more types of prebiotic fibers, which will select for certain species of bacteria.

The bacteria in the gut have coevolved with us through natural selection.  If you supply the appropriate food ingredients, they self-select for the limited real estate in your colon.  It’s like living in on an island.  Only those who can thrive in the area will be there based on the food present while waging war against other strains of bacteria for space.  The bacteria that enjoy a processed food diet that is low in plant fibers will flourish in the guts of those who eat those foods.

The gastrointestinal tract is not just for digestion and absorption.  It is an endocrine and immunity organ.  It responds to relative energy deficits and surpluses in the body through diet and exercise, which also selects for different types of bacteria.  This is a relatively newer area of science that is just now being charted.

For these reasons, I am not a germaphobe.  There are many good bacteria that I do not want to get rid of, which can happen through excessive antibiotic use and being overly antiseptic.  Don’t get me wrong: I still believe food safety is important for the general public that may have a weak immune system with limited varieties of bacteria present who cannot literally stomach any new invaders that cause foodborne illness.  People should throw out spoiled food and not take risks with food that has been left out, cooked to the proper temperature, or reheated to the proper temperature.

Other opinions I really disagree with on the quoted expert panel:

  1. I don’t believe you have to take glutathione, cysteine, and vitamin C in supplement form three times a day as one of the “experts” recommends.  Sounds like he wants to sell some supplements!
  2. Probiotic supplement pushers.  We were just fine without taking these many years ago.  You cannot get healthier than a non-disease state by consuming supplements, in most cases.
  3. We don’t all need to be popping magnesium.  Just because it is a component in physiological and biochemical systems does not support the recommendation you need to start supplementing without clear evidence of deficiency in real lab tests.  Don’t get me started on real lab tests.  That’s another blog post, but in short, there are a lot of sham lab tests out there that support a set agenda.  This woman has a conflict of interest that is pretty evident also.
  4. You cannot “alkalise [sic-British]” your body.  The blood pH is strictly maintained between 7.35-7.45 (slightly basic) via bicarbonate excretion of the kidneys and carbon dioxide release in lungs, which reduces the carbonic acid produced from the carbon dioxide produced at the end of glycolysis in the transformation of pyruvate to acetyl-CoA.  If your blood isn’t in this range, you likely are in a serious disease state, such as respiratory or kidney failure.

Janice Maras had a good quote.  Shout out to her.

If you have any comments feel free to post below.

 



Share on FacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmailFacebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedintumblrmail

Tags: , , , , ,