China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Review of Chemosensation for Weight Loss
Published in Alan R. Hirsch, Nutrition and Sensation, 2023
The possibility that introduction of noncaloric sweet taste to food could induce weight loss was examined with the artificial sweetener aspartame. In 12 men and 12 women, normal weight, nondieting volunteers, the ingestion of aspartame artificial sweetener added to breakfast cereal significantly diminished hunger two hours later, as compared to ingestion of plain or even sucrose sweetened cereal (Mattes 1990). These results suggest that a noncaloric sweet taste, when added to a traditionally sweet food, can enhance induction of satiety to a greater degree than sugar itself!
Chemosensation
Published in Emily Crews Splane, Neil E. Rowland, Anaya Mitra, Psychology of Eating, 2019
Emily Crews Splane, Neil E. Rowland, Anaya Mitra
The principal GPCRs involved in sweet taste are members 2 and 3 of taste receptor type 1, abbreviated T1R2 and T1R3. These each have a particularly long string of amino acids at the free (non-looping) domain outside the cell. T1R2 and T1R3 aggregate together in the membrane of the taste cell to form a heterodimer (two different or hetero entities). These long ends form what is called a venus flytrap module that essentially snares a variety of molecular types, and all of these give rise to a sweet taste. These include sucrose, fructose, and artificial sweeteners such as aspartame and stevia. In this way, only two receptor types can be activated by a wide range of tastants. For completeness, there may be other sweet transduction mechanisms, but we will not discuss those in this text (see Roper & Chaudhari, 2017).
The safety and quality of food
Published in Geoffrey P. Webb, Nutrition, 2019
Some additives are essential as processing aids or otherwise necessary for the manufacture of a considerable number of supermarket foods. Some of these foods are considered to be “healthy foods” and seen as important in helping consumers to comply with current nutrition education guidelines. Emulsifiers and stabilisers are essential for the production of many “reduced-fat” products like low fat spread and polyunsaturated margarine. Anti-caking agents are needed for the manufacture of many powders that are to be instantly rehydrated like coffee whitener. Artificial sweeteners or sugar replacers are necessary for the production of many “low calorie” and “reduced sugar” foods and drinks. The new UK sugar tax is effectively encouraging producers to replace sugar with calorie-free sweeteners.
Maternal consumption of artificially sweetened beverages during pregnancy is associated with infant gut microbiota and metabolic modifications and increased infant body mass index
Published in Gut Microbes, 2021
Isabelle Laforest-Lapointe, Allan B. Becker, Piushkumar J. Mandhane, Stuart E. Turvey, Theo J. Moraes, Malcolm R. Sears, Padmaja Subbarao, Laura K. Sycuro, Meghan B. Azad, Marie-Claire Arrieta
Common low-calorie sweeteners include synthetic artificial sweeteners (e.g. non-acesulfame-potassium, aspartame, advantame, neotame), sugar alcohols (e.g. erythritol, xylitol), and plant-based sweeteners (e.g. sucralose, thaumatin, monk fruit).25 The effects of artificial sweeteners on the gut microbiome are diverse, including impacts on composition and function (see Suez et al.26 for a synthesis). Suez et al.27 also demonstrated that artificial sweetener consumption in adult mice directly impacts gut microbiome composition and function, leading to an increase in host glucose intolerance. More recently, Stichelen et al.24 addressed gestational exposure to artificial sweeteners, finding changes in bacterial metabolites and a decrease in Akkermansia municiphila in the pups’ gut microbiome. However, the consequences of maternal artificial sweetener consumption during pregnancy on the infant gut microbiota have not been reported in humans.
A structure-based approach towards the identification of novel antichagasic compounds: Trypanosoma cruzi carbonic anhydrase inhibitors
Published in Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and Medicinal Chemistry, 2020
Manuel A. Llanos, María L. Sbaraglini, María L. Villalba, María D. Ruiz, Carolina Carrillo, Catalina Alba Soto, Alan Talevi, Andrea Angeli, Seppo Parkkila, Claudiu T. Supuran, Luciana Gavernet
The docking calculations were fully validated through a test set of compounds with reported activity against TcCA, which led us to find a structural model with the best scoring power. By the application of the model in a virtual screening campaign we identified sulphamides with high potency and selectivity against the ubiquitous human CAII isoform. Additionally, the model selected two commercial and widely used artificial sweeteners with abundant toxicological data available. They share the sulphamate function, a bioisosteric partner of sulphamide as zinc-binding function. The assays in parasites identified sodium cyclamate as the most promising structure in terms of trypanocidal activity, reducing trypomastigote viability by 48% at 20 µM. Further molecular modelling and SAR studies will be performed in future investigations, to achieve a deeper knowledge about the molecular determinants of the potency and selectivity against TcCA.
Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Cancer Risk: A Narrative Review
Published in Nutrition and Cancer, 2022
Carmen Arroyo-Quiroz, Regina Brunauer, Silvestre Alavez
Since sugar may be the culprit in driving cancer risk upon SSB consumption, ASB could be an alternative. Up to now, most previous studies have found no evidence that artificial sweeteners are carcinogenic (103–105); however, studies on new artificial sweeteners are still ongoing. Information about a link, or its absence, between ASB and cancer risk is scarce. Some studies suggest that ASB are related to hormone alterations, microbiota changes and taste preference (104, 106), specifically through the effect of caramels for coloring beverages or flavoring (58, 101), but the relationship with cancer is still weak. Only a few of the studies discussed in this review included information about ASB. NutriNet-Santé and MCCS reported no association between ASB and overall cancer risk and obesity-related cancers, respectively (45, 74). In contrast, a study that analyzed obesity-unrelated cancers in the MCCS found a significant relationship with ASB, which was unexpected by the authors and speculated to be due to unmeasured confounding or chance (101). However, it is important to emphasize that ASB intake in both studies was lower than in other populations: Only 6% of the MCCS study participants consumed ASB regularly (101), while in the USA, for example, the prevalence is about 10% (107); the median intake in the NutriNet-Santé cohort was 6.9 mL/day whereas, in other countries, like the United Kingdom, the median intake was more than 60 mL/day in 2015 (45, 108). Also, even if the evidence regarding differential effect in the metabolism of different types of artificial-sweeteners is still scarce (57) and not conclusive (109), it would be important to analyze, in future studies, if this could be a factor that affects the lack of significance in the reviewed studies.