Measuring Artificial Sweeteners Toxicity Using a Bioluminescent Bacterial Panel, 2018, Harpaz et al

[Andy]

Abstract
Artificial sweeteners have become increasingly controversial due to their questionable influence on consumers’ health. They are introduced in most foods and many consume this added ingredient without their knowledge. Currently, there is still no consensus regarding the health consequences of artificial sweeteners intake as they have not been fully investigated. Consumption of artificial sweeteners has been linked with adverse effects such as cancer, weight gain, metabolic disorders, type-2 diabetes and alteration of gut microbiota activity. Moreover, artificial sweeteners have been identified as emerging environmental pollutants, and can be found in receiving waters, i.e., surface waters, groundwater aquifers and drinking waters.

In this study, the relative toxicity of six FDA-approved artificial sweeteners (aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k (ace-k)) and that of ten sport supplements containing these artificial sweeteners, were tested using genetically modified bioluminescent bacteria from E. coli. The bioluminescent bacteria, which luminesce when they detect toxicants, act as a sensing model representative of the complex microbial system. Both induced luminescent signals and bacterial growth were measured.

Toxic effects were found when the bacteria were exposed to certain concentrations of the artificial sweeteners. In the bioluminescence activity assay, two toxicity response patterns were observed, namely, the induction and inhibition of the bioluminescent signal. An inhibition response pattern may be observed in the response of sucralose in all the tested strains: TV1061 (MLIC = 1 mg/mL), DPD2544 (MLIC = 50 mg/mL) and DPD2794 (MLIC = 100 mg/mL). It is also observed in neotame in the DPD2544 (MLIC = 2 mg/mL) strain. On the other hand, the induction response pattern may be observed in its response in saccharin in TV1061 (MLIndC = 5 mg/mL) and DPD2794 (MLIndC = 5 mg/mL) strains, aspartame in DPD2794 (MLIndC = 4 mg/mL) strain, and ace-k in DPD2794 (MLIndC = 10 mg/mL) strain.

The results of this study may help in understanding the relative toxicity of artificial sweeteners on E. coli, a sensing model representative of the gut bacteria. Furthermore, the tested bioluminescent bacterial panel can potentially be used for detecting artificial sweeteners in the environment, using a specific mode-of-action pattern.

Open access at https://www.mdpi.com/1420-3049/23/10/2454


Neuroscience News article about the study.

Summary: A new study reports FDA approved artificial sweeteners and some sports supplements are toxic to digestive gut bacteria. Researchers say the consumption of artificial sweeteners can adversely affect gut microbial activity, causing a wide range of health issues from cancers to type-2 diabetes.

Source: Ben-Gurion University.

FDA-approved artificial sweeteners and sport supplements were found to be toxic to digestive gut microbes, according to a new paper published in Molecules by researchers at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (BGU) in Israel and Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

The collaborative study indicated relative toxicity of six artificial sweeteners (aspartame, sucralose, saccharine, neotame, advantame, and acesulfame potassium-k) and 10 sport supplements containing these artificial sweeteners. The bacteria found in the digestive system became toxic when exposed to concentrations of only one mg./ml. of the artificial sweeteners.

Link to article, https://neurosciencenews.com/artificial-sweetener-microbiome-9935/

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

This piece of ‘research’ has pretty much been slammed as fake news across most of the reputable scientific community in my world...the main reason being that pretty much any ingredient at artificially high doses would cause a toxic effect at 100’s of times it’s normal dose ever found in the gut. This study cannot be directly related to how food is absorbed and metabolised by the gut, so just sitting bacteria in a toxic bath and claiming they die is a bit of a nonsense. I think microflora in the gut is much more complicated than that so this study tells us nothing. Perhaps they should have done lemon juice or even peanut butter for context?

There is no reliable in vitro study that is accepted as representative of the human gut, so this study scores a double nonsense award from me. , I didn’t even bother saving the study for my file at work when I saw it ...it’s that bad.

Bioluminescence assays are very old techniques btw, one of my mentors when I was working in a research lab ...in the uhmm, 1980’s did his phd using them.

It’s disappointing to see such blatant fake propaganda based on such garbage, but poor reporting by journalists are likely to have a field day on this...let’s hope some sense will prevail with a balanced view. I notice the crazies are emerging from under their rocks already this morning.

 

[Alvin]

This piece of ‘research’ has pretty much been slammed as fake news across most of the reputable scientific community in my world...the main reason being that pretty much any ingredient at artificially high doses would cause a toxic effect at 100’s of times it’s normal dose ever found in the gut

I didn't know its already been slammed having not heard of it till this thread but as soon as i read it i thought how can such disparate molecules all cause the same thing. Gut bacteria are not homogeneous. Its like those who believe natural is good and artificial is bad, thats simplistic stupidity.

 

[Little Bluestem]

But artificial sweeteners still taste bad.

 

[arewenearlythereyet]

But artificial sweeteners still taste bad.

Yes they do to me too. And we are not alone....around about 20-25% of people (from memory) will taste much stronger bitter notes from aspartame and saccharine (and other sweeteners) than everyone else ...it’s genetic.