Polyphenol Paprika Pepper Penne

10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

This one’s easier to promptly prepare than it is to pronounce unprepared! Ok, enough alliteration: this dish is as full of flavor as it is full of antioxidants, and it’s great for digestive health and heart health too.

You will need

  • 4 large red bell peppers, diced
  • 2 red onions, roughly chopped
  • 1 bulb garlic, finely chopped
  • 2 cups cherry tomatoes, halved
  • 10oz wholemeal penne pasta
  • 1 tbsp nutritional yeast
  • 1 tbsp smoked paprika
  • 1 tbsp black pepper
  • Extra virgin olive oil for drizzling

Method

(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)

1) Preheat the oven to 200℃ / 400℉ / Gas mark 6

2) Put the vegetables in a roasting tin; drizzle with oil, sprinkle with the seasonings (nooch, paprika, black pepper), stir well to mix and distribute the seasonings evenly, and roast for 20–25 minutes, stirring/turning occasionally. When the edges begin to caramelize, turn off the heat, but leave to keep warm.

3) Cook the penne al dente (this should take 7–8 minutes in boiling salted water). Rinse in cold water, then pass a kettle of hot water over them to reheat. This process removed starch and lowered the glycemic index, before reheating the pasta so that it’s hot to serve.

4) Place the roasted vegetables in a food processor and blitz for just a few seconds. You want to produce a very chunky sauce—but not just chunks or just sauce.

5) Combine the sauce and pasta to serve immediately.

Enjoy!

Want to learn more?

For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:

Take care!

Don’t Forget…

Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

Recommended

  • Black Bean Hummus Panini
  • The Fiber Fueled Cookbook – by Dr. Will Bulsiewicz
    Delve into holistic gut health with Dr. Bulsiewicz’s guide, addressing conditions like FODMAPs and histamine intolerance, offering a five-part strategy, and over 100 versatile recipes.

Learn to Age Gracefully

Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Toxic Gas That Sterilizes Medical Devices Prompts Safety Rule Update

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Over the past two years, Madeline Beal has heard frustration and even bewilderment during public meetings about ethylene oxide, a cancer-causing gas that is used to sterilize half of the medical devices in the U.S.

    Beal, senior risk communication adviser for the Environmental Protection Agency, has fielded questions about why the agency took so long to alert people who live near facilities that emit the chemical about unusually high amounts of the carcinogenic gas in their neighborhoods. Residents asked why the EPA couldn’t close those facilities, and they wanted to know how many people had developed cancer from their exposure.

    “If you’re upset by the information you’re hearing tonight, if you’re angry, if it scares you to think about risk to your family, those are totally reasonable responses,” Beal told an audience in Laredo, Texas, in September 2022. “We think the risk levels near this facility are too high.”

    There are about 90 sterilizing plants in the U.S. that use ethylene oxide, and for decades companies used the chemical to sterilize medical products without drawing much attention. Many medical device-makers send their products to the plants to be sterilized before they are shipped, typically to medical distribution companies.

    But people living around these facilities have been jolted in recent years by a succession of warnings about cancer risk from the federal government and media reports, an awareness that has also spawned protests and lawsuits alleging medical harm.

    The EPA is expected to meet a March 1 court-ordered deadline to finalize tighter safety rules around how the toxic gas is used. The proposed changes come in the wake of a 2016 agency report that found that long-term exposure to ethylene oxide is more dangerous than was previously thought.

    But the anticipated final rules — the agency’s first regulatory update on ethylene oxide emissions in more than a decade — are expected to face pushback. Medical device-makers worry stricter regulation will increase costs and may put patients at higher risk of infection from devices, ranging from surgical kits to catheters, due to deficient sterilization. The new rules are also not likely to satisfy the concerns of environmentalists or members of the public, who already have expressed frustration about how long it took the federal government to sound the alarm.

    “We have been breathing this air for 40 years,” said Connie Waller, 70, who lives with her husband, David, 75, within two miles of such a sterilizing plant in Covington, Georgia, east of Atlanta. “The only way to stop these chemicals is to hit them in their pocketbook, to get their attention.”

    The EPA says data shows that long-term exposure to ethylene oxide can increase the risk of breast cancer and cancers of the white blood cells, such as non-Hodgkin lymphoma, myeloma, and lymphocytic leukemia. It can irritate the eyes, nose, throat, and lungs, and has been linked to damage to the brain and nervous and reproductive systems. Children are potentially more vulnerable, as are workers routinely exposed to the chemical, EPA officials say. The agency calculates the risk based on how much of the gas is in the air or near the sterilizing facility, the distance a person is from the plant, and how long the person is exposed.

    Waller said she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004 and that her husband was found to have non-Hodgkin lymphoma eight years later.

    A 2022 study of communities living near a sterilization facility in Laredo found the rates of acute lymphocytic leukemia and breast cancer were greater than expected based on statewide rates, a difference that was statistically significant.

    Beal, the EPA risk adviser, who regularly meets with community members, acknowledges the public’s concerns. “We don’t think it’s OK for you to be at increased risk from something that you have no control over, that’s near your house,” she said. “We are working as fast as we can to get that risk reduced with the powers that we have available to us.”

    In the meantime, local and state governments and industry groups have scrambled to defuse public outcry.

    Hundreds of personal injury cases have been filed in communities near sterilizing plants. In 2020, New Mexico’s then-attorney general filed a lawsuit against a plant in Santa Teresa, and that case is ongoing. In a case that settled last year in suburban Atlanta, a company agreed to pay $35 million to 79 people who alleged ethylene oxide used at the plant caused cancer and other injuries.

    In Cook County, Illinois, a jury in 2022 awarded $363 million to a woman who alleged exposure to ethylene oxide gas led to her breast cancer diagnosis. But, in another Illinois case, a jury ruled that the sterilizing company was not liable for a woman’s blood cancer claim.

    Greg Crist, chief advocacy officer for the Advanced Medical Technology Association, a medical device trade group that says ethylene oxide is an effective and reliable sterilant, attributes the spate of lawsuits to the litigious nature of trial attorneys.

    “If they smell blood in the water, they’ll go after it,” Crist said.

    Most states have at least one sterilizing plant. According to the EPA, a handful, like California and North Carolina, have gone further than the agency and the federal Clean Air Act to regulate ethylene oxide emissions. After a media and political firestorm raised awareness about the metro Atlanta facilities, Georgia started requiring sterilizing plants that use the gas to report all leaks.

    The proposed rules the EPA is set to finalize would set lower emissions limits for chemical plants and commercial sterilizers and increase some safety requirements for workers within these facilities. The agency is expected to set an 18-month deadline for commercial sterilizers to come into compliance with the emissions rules.

    That would help at facilities that “cut corners,” with lax pollution controls that allow emissions of the gas into nearby communities, said Richard Peltier, a professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. Stronger regulation also prevents the plants from remaining under the radar. “One of the dirty secrets is that a lot of it is self-regulated or self-policed,” Peltier added.

    But the proposed rules did not include protections for workers at off-site warehouses that store sterilized products, which can continue to emit ethylene oxide. They also did not require air testing around the facilities, prompting debate about how effective they would be in protecting the health of nearby residents.

    Industry officials also don’t expect an alternative that is as broadly effective as ethylene oxide to be developed anytime soon, though they support researching other methods. Current alternatives include steam, radiation, and hydrogen peroxide vapor.

    Increasing the use of alternatives can reduce industry dependence on “the crutch of ethylene oxide,” said Darya Minovi, senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group.

    But meeting the new guidelines will be disruptive to the industry, Crist said. He estimates companies will spend upward of $500 million to comply with the new EPA rules and could struggle to meet the agency’s 18-month timetable. Sterilization companies will also have difficulty adjusting to new rules on how workers handle the gas without a dip in efficiency, Crist said.

    The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates drugs and medical devices, is also watching the regulatory moves closely and worries the updated emissions rule could “present some unique challenges” if implemented as proposed, said Audra Harrison, an FDA spokesperson. “The FDA is concerned about the rule’s effects on the availability of medical devices,” she added.

    Other groups, like the American Chemistry Council and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state’s environmental agency, assert that ethylene oxide use isn’t as dangerous as the EPA says. The EPA’s toxicity assessment has “severe flaws” and is “overly conservative,” the council said in an emailed statement. Texas, which has several sterilizing plants, has said ethylene oxide isn’t as high a cancer risk as the agency claims, an assessment that the EPA has rejected.

    Tracey Woodruff, a researcher at the University of California-San Francisco who previously worked at the EPA, said it can be hard for the agency to keep up with regulating chemicals like ethylene oxide because of constrained resources, the technical complications of rulemaking, and industry lobbying.

    But she’s hopeful the EPA can strike a balance between its desire to reduce exposure and the desire of the FDA not to disrupt medical device sterilization. And scrutiny can also help the device sterilization industry think outside the box.

    “We continue to discover these chemicals that we’ve already been exposed to were toxic, and we have high exposures,” she said. “Regulation is an innovation forcer.”

    KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about KFF.

    Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

    Share This Post

  • Sleep wrinkles are real. Here’s how they leave their mark

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    You wake up, stagger to the bathroom and gaze into the mirror. No, you’re not imagining it. You’ve developed face wrinkles overnight. They’re sleep wrinkles.

    Sleep wrinkles are temporary. But as your skin loses its elasticity as you age, they can set in.

    Here’s what you can do to minimise the chance of them forming in the first place.

    How side-sleeping affects your face

    Your skin wrinkles for a number of reasons, including ageing, sun damage, smoking, poor hydration, habitual facial expressions (such as grinning, pouting, frowning, squinting) and sleeping positions.

    When you sleep on your side or stomach, your face skin is squeezed and crushed a lot more than if you sleep on your back. When you sleep on your side or stomach, gravity presses your face against the pillow. Your face skin is distorted as your skin is stretched, compressed and pulled in all directions as you move about in your sleep.

    You can reduce these external forces acting on the face by sleeping on your back or changing positions frequently.

    Doctors can tell which side you sleep on by looking at your face

    In a young face, sleep wrinkles are transient and disappear after waking.

    Temporary sleep wrinkles can become persistent with time and repetition. As we age, our skin loses elasticity (recoil) and extensibility (stretch), creating ideal conditions for sleep wrinkles or lines to set in and last longer.

    The time spent in each sleeping position, the magnitude of external forces applied to each area of the face, as well as the surface area of contact with the pillow surface, also affects the pattern and rate of sleep wrinkle formation.

    Skin specialists can often recognise this. People who favour sleeping on one side of their body tend to have a flatter face on their sleeping side and more visible sleep lines.

    Can a night skincare routine avoid sleep wrinkles?

    Collagen and elastin are two primary components of the dermis (inner layer) of skin. They form the skin structure and maintain the elasticity of skin.

    Skin structure
    The dermis is the inner layer of skin. mermaid3/Shutterstock

    Supplementing collagen through skincare routines to enhance skin elasticity can help reduce wrinkle formation.

    Hyaluronic acid is a naturally occurring molecule in human bodies. It holds our skin’s collagen and elastin in a proper configuration, stimulates the production of collagen and adds hydration, which can help slow down wrinkle formation. Hyaluronic acid is one of the most common active ingredients in skincare creams, gels and lotions.

    Moisturisers can hydrate the skin in different ways. “Occlusive” substances produce a thin layer of oil on the skin that prevents water loss due to evaporation. “Humectants” attract and hold water in the skin, and they can differ in their capacity to bind with water, which influences the degree of skin hydration.

    Do silk pillowcases actually make a difference?

    Bed with silk sheets and pillowcases
    Can they help? New Africa/Shutterstock

    Silk pillowcases can make a difference in wrinkle formation, if they let your skin glide and move, rather than adding friction and pressure on a single spot. If you can, use silk sheets and silk pillows.

    Studies have also shown pillows designed to reduce mechanical stress during sleep can prevent skin deformations. Such a pillow could be useful in slowing down and preventing the formation of certain facial wrinkles.

    Sleeping on your back can reduce the risk of sleep lines, as can a nighttime routine of moisturising before sleep.

    Otherwise, lifestyle choices and habits, such quitting smoking, drinking plenty of water, a healthy diet (eating enough vegetables, fruits, nuts, seeds, healthy fats, yogurt and other fermented foods) and regular use of sunscreens can help improve the appearance of the skin on our face.

    Yousuf Mohammed, Dermatology researcher, The University of Queensland; Khanh Phan, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Frazer Institute, The University of Queensland, and Vania Rodrigues Leite E. Silva, Honorary Associate Professor, Frazer Institute, The University of Queensland

    This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

    Share This Post

  • Better Sex Through Mindfulness – by Dr. Lori Brotto

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Female sexuality is such a taboo topic that, if one searches for (ob/gyn professor, women’s health research director, and psychologist) Dr. Brotto’s book on Google or Amazon, it suggests only “lori brotto mindfulness book”. So, for those brave enough to read a book that would have shocked Victorians, what does this one contain?

    The focus is on, as the title suggests, better sex, by and for women. That said, it’s mostly because typically women are more likely to experience the problems described in the book; it’s nothing actually intrinsic to womanhood. A man with the same problems could read this book and benefit just the same.

    While the book covers many possible problems between the sheets, the overarching theme is problems of the mind, such as:

    • Not getting into the mood in the first place
    • Losing the mood quickly and easily, such as by becoming distracted
    • Difficulty achieving orgasm even when mechanically everything’s delightful
    • Physical discomfort creating a barrier to enjoyment

    …and yes, that last one is in part mind-stuff too! Though Dr. Brotto isn’t arguing that mindfulness is a panacea, just an incredibly useful tool. And, it’s one she not only explains very well, but also explains from the position of a wealth of scientific evidence… Enough so, that we see a one-star Amazon reviewer from Canada complained that it was too well-referenced! For us, though, it’s what we like to see.

    Good science, presented clearly and usefully, giving practical tips that improve people’s lives.

    Bottom line: if you’ve ever lost the mood because you got distracted into thinking about taxes or that meeting on Tuesday, this is the book for you.

    Click here to check out Better Sex Through Mindfulness—you can thank us later!

    Share This Post

Related Posts

  • Black Bean Hummus Panini
  • 5 Ways To Beat Afternoon Energy Slumps

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    This is Nisha Vora, of Rainbow Plant Life fame. After graduating from Harvard Law School, she realized she hated being a lawyer, and pivoted completely to become what she now is 12 years later, a chef and health coach.

    Here are her tips for boosting energy through the day:

    Caffeine timing

    If you don’t do caffeine at all, no need to change that, but if you do, Vora advises that midday is the best time for it, with a very good rationale:

    • of course it should not be too late in the day, because the elimination half-life of caffeine (4–8 hours to eliminate just half of the caffeine, depending on genes, call it 6 hours as an average though honestly for most people it will either be 4 or 8, not 6) is such that it can easily interfere with sleep for most people
    • because caffeine is an adenosine blocker, not an adenosine inhibitor, taking caffeine in the morning means either there’s no adenosine to block, or it’ll just “save” that adenosine for later, i.e. when the caffeine is eliminated, then the adenosine will kick in, meaning that your morning sleepiness has now been deferred to the afternoon, rather than eliminated.

    Another reminder that caffeine is the “payday loan” of energy. So, midday it is. No morning sleepiness to defer, and yet also not so late as to interfere with sleep.

    See also: Calculate (And Enjoy) The Perfect Night’s Sleep

    Simplify what can be simplified

    This one’s not from a physiological basis, but rather, that a lot of the time most of us have much of our energy being taken by constant task-switching (what gets called multitasking, but as our brain is a single processor, it really means switching rapidly between different kinds of cognition, which is not efficient). In order to avoid that energy drain, try to streamline things and make a particular effort to not only single-task, but to do so without distractions.

    Counterpoint: if you have unmedicated ADHD, then chances are you’ll do better with a single small distraction chosen by you, than trying to go without distractions, because your brain will find distractions anyway, so you might as well choose one (for many people it is background music, or a podcast or TV show that one doesn’t may attention to but it’s there) as a matter of harm reduction, and that way you’ll do better at focusing on your primary task than if your brain were reaching out for every and any possible distraction.

    Manage your blood sugars

    In particular, she advocates for avoiding sugary breakfasts, opting instead for protein, fat, and fiber-rich options. For more in this regard, see:

    10 Ways To Balance Your Blood Sugars

    Walk after meals

    You don’t have to don hiking boots and “I am just going outside and may be some time“; rather, even a 2–5 minute walk after a meal helps regulate digestion and glucose levels, avoiding postprandial energy slumps.

    So,

    • if you have a treadmill, after eating is a great time to use it for a few minutes
    • if you have stairs, now’s a great time to go up and down them a few times

    One last technique for when everything else fails

    We’ll quote her directly on this one:

    ❝Despite my best efforts, soemtimes I just have one of those days. Maybe I didn’t sleep well or I’m distracted by my never ending thoughts. If I need to be productive or energized on those days, I will do something that I absolutely hate:

    I will take a cold shower.

    And I hate it because I’m already always cold all the time, so why would I want to get a cold shower?

    Well, it’s because cold water immersion has been shown to dramatically boost your dopamine levels, which gives you more energy and motivation.

    In the moment though, it’s mostly painful and I hate everything and everyone around me.

    But I know that if I can suffer through two minutes of a cold shower, I will feel so refreshed.❞

    There are more benefits than just that, though, see:

    A Cold Shower A Day Keeps The Doctor Away?

    Want more from Nisha Vora?

    We reviewed one of her books a while back:

    The Vegan Instant Pot Cookbook – by Nisha Vora

    Enjoy!

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • Shame and blame can create barriers to vaccination

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    Understanding the stigma surrounding infectious diseases like HIV and mpox may help community health workers break down barriers that hinder access to care.

    Looking back in history can provide valuable lessons to confront stigma in health care today, especially toward Black, Latine, LGBTQ+, and other historically underserved communities disproportionately affected by COVID-19 and HIV.

    Public Good News spoke with Sam Brown, HIV prevention and wellness program manager at Civic Heart, a community-based organization in Houston’s historic Third Ward, to understand the effects of stigma around sexual health and vaccine uptake. 

    Brown shared more about Civic Heart’s efforts to provide free confidential testing for sexually transmitted infections, counseling and referrals, and information about COVID-19, flu, and mpox vaccinations, as well as the lessons they’re learning as they strive for vaccine equity.

    Here’s what Brown said.

    [Editor’s note: This content has been edited for clarity and length.]

    PGN: Some people on social media have spread the myth that vaccines cause AIDS or other immune deficiencies when the opposite is true: Vaccines strengthen our immune systems to help protect against disease. Despite being frequently debunked, how do false claims like these impact the communities you serve?

    Sam Brown: Misinformation like that is so hard to combat. And it makes the work and the path to overall community health hard because people will believe it. In the work that we do, 80 percent of it is changing people’s perspective on something they thought they knew.

    You know, people don’t even transmit AIDS. People transmit HIV. So, a vaccine causing immunodeficiency doesn’t make sense. 

    With the communities we serve, we might have a person that will believe the myth, and because they believe it, they won’t get vaccinated. Then later, they may test positive for COVID-19. 

    And depending on social determinants of health, it can impact them in a whole heap of ways: That person is now missing work, they’re not able to provide for their family—if they have a family. It’s this mindset that can impact a person’s life, their income, their ability to function. 

    So, to not take advantage of something like a vaccine that’s affordable, or free for the most part, just because of misinformation or a misunderstanding—that’s detrimental, you know. 

    For example, when we talk to people in the community, many don’t know that they can get mpox from their pet, or that it’s zoonotic—that means that it can be transferred between different species or different beings, from animals to people. I see a lot of surprise and shock [when people learn this]. 

    It’s difficult because we have to fight the misinformation and the stigma that comes with it. And it can be a big barrier.

    People misunderstand. [They] think that “this is something that gay people or the LGBTQ+ community get,” which is stigmatizing and comes off as blaming. And blaming is the thing that leads us to be misinformed. 

    PGN: In the last couple years, your organization’s HIV Wellness program has taken on promoting COVID-19, flu, and mpox vaccines to the communities you serve. How do you navigate conversations between sexual health and infectious diseases? Can you share more about your messaging strategies?

    S.B.: As we promoted positive sexual health and HIV prevention, we saw people were tired of hearing about HIV. They were tired of hearing about how PrEP works, or how to prevent HIV

    But, when we had an outbreak of syphilis in Houston just last year, people were more inclined to test because of the severity of the outbreak. 

    So, what our team learned is that sometimes you have to change the message to get people what they need. 

    We changed our message to highlight more syphilis information and saw that we were able to get more people tested for HIV because we correlated how syphilis and HIV are connected and how a person can be susceptible to both. 

    Using messages that the community wants and pairing them with what the community needs has been better for us. And we see that same thing with COVID-19, the flu, and RSV. Sometimes you just can’t be married to a message. We’ve had to be flexible to meet our clients where they are to help them move from unsafe practices to practices that are healthy and good for them and their communities.

    PGN: You’ve mentioned how hard it is to combat stigma in your work. How do you effectively address it when talking to people one-on-one?

    S.B.: What I understand is that no one wants to feel shame. What I see people respond to is, “Here’s an opportunity to do something different. Maybe there was information that you didn’t know that caused you to make a bad decision. And now here’s an opportunity to gain information so that you can make a better decision.”

    People want to do what they want to do; they want to live how they want to live. And we all should be able to do that as long as it’s not hurting anyone, but also being responsible enough to understand that, you know, COVID-19 is here. 

    So, instead of shaming and blaming, it’s best to make yourself aware and understand what it is and how to treat it. Because the real enemy is the virus—it’s the infection, not the people. 

    When we do our work, we want to make sure that we come from a strengths-based approach. We always look at what a client can do, what that client has. We want to make sure that we’re empowering them from that point. So, even if they choose not to prioritize our message right now, we can’t take that personally. We’ll just use it as a chance to try a new way of framing it to help people understand what we’re trying to say. 

    And sometimes that can be difficult, even for organizations. But getting past that difficulty comes with a greater opportunity to impact someone else.

    This article first appeared on Public Good News and is republished here under a Creative Commons license.

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails:

  • The Sucralose News: Scaremongering Or Serious?

    10almonds is reader-supported. We may, at no cost to you, receive a portion of sales if you purchase a product through a link in this article.

    What’s the news on sucralose?

    These past days the press has been abuzz with frightening tales:

    How true and/or serious is this?

    Firstly, let’s manage expectations. Pineapple juice also breaks down DNA, but is not generally considered a health risk. So let’s keep that in mind, while we look into the science.

    Is sucralose as scary as pineapple juice, or is it something actually dangerous?

    The new study (that sparked off these headlines)

    The much-referenced study is publicly available to read in full—here it is:

    Toxicological and pharmacokinetic properties of sucralose-6-acetate and its parent sucralose: in vitro screening assays

    You may notice that this doesn’t have quite the snappy punchiness of some of the headlines, but let’s break this down, if you’ll pardon the turn of phrase:

    • Toxicological: pertaining to whether or not it has toxic qualities
    • Pharmacokinetic: the science of asking, of chemicals in bodies, “where did it come from; where did it go; what could it do there; what can we know?”
    • Sucralose-6-acetate: an impurity that can be found in sucralose. For perspective, the study found that the sucralose in Splenda contained “up to” 0.67% sucralose-6-acetate.
    • Sucralose: a modified form of sucrose, that makes it hundreds of times sweeter, and non-caloric because the body cannot break it down so it’s treated as a dietary fiber and just passes through
    • In vitro: things are happening in petri dishes, not in animals (human or otherwise), which would be called “in vivo”
    • Screening assays: “we set up a very closed-parameters chemical test, to see what happens when we add this to this” ⇽ oversimplification, but this is the basic format of a screening assay

    Great, now we understand the title, but what about the study?

    Researchers looked primarily at the effects of sucralose-6-acetate and sucralose (together and separately) on epithelial cells (these are very simple cells that are easy to study; conveniently, they are also most of what makes up our intestinal walls). For this, they used a fancy way of replicating human intestinal walls, that’s actually quite fascinating but beyond the scope of today’s newsletter. Suffice it to say: it’s quite good, and/but has its limitations too. They also looked at some in vivo rat studies.

    What they found was…

    Based on samples from the rat feces (somehow this didn’t make it into the headlines), it appears that sucralose may be acetylated in the intestines. What that means is that we, if we are like the rats (definitely not a given, but a reasonable hypothesis), might convert up to 10% of sucralose into sucralose-6-acetate inside us. Iff we do, the next part of the findings become more serious.

    Based on the in vitro simulations, both sucralose and sucralose-6-acetate reduced intestinal barrier integrity at least a little, but sucralose-6-acetate was the kicker when it came to most of the effects—at least, so we (reasonably!) suppose.

    Basically, there’s a lot of supposition going on here but the suppositions are reasonable. That’s how science works; there’s usually little we can know for sure from a single study; it’s when more studies roll in that we start to get a more complete picture.

    What was sucralose-6-acetate found to do? It increased the expression of genes associated with inflammation, oxidative stress, and cancer (granted those three things generally go together). So that’s a “this probably has this end result” supposition.

    More concretely, and which most of the headlines latched onto, it was found (in vitro) to induce cytogenic damage, specifically, of the clastogenic variety (produces DNA strand breaks—so this is different than pineapple’s bromelain and DNA-helicase’s relatively harmless unzipping of genes).

    The dose makes the poison

    So, how much is too much and is that 0.67% something to worry about?

    • Remembering the rat study, it may be more like 10% once our intestines have done their thing. Iff we’re like rats.
    • But, even if it’s only 0.67%, this will still be above the “threshold of toxicological concern for genotoxicity”, of 0.15µg/person/day.
    • On the other hand, the fact that these were in vitro studies is a serious limitation.
    • Sometimes something is very dangerous in vitro, because it’s being put directly onto cells, whereas in vivo we may have mechanisms for dealing with that.

    We won’t know for sure until we get in vivo studies in human subjects, and that may not happen any time soon, if ever, depending on the technical limitations and ethical considerations that sometimes preclude doing certain studies in humans.

    Bottom line:

    • The headlines are written to be scary, but aren’t wrong; their claims are fundamentally true
    • What that means for us as actual humans may not be the same, however; we don’t know yet
    • For now, it is probably reasonable to avoid sucralose just in case

    Don’t Forget…

    Did you arrive here from our newsletter? Don’t forget to return to the email to continue learning!

    Learn to Age Gracefully

    Join the 98k+ American women taking control of their health & aging with our 100% free (and fun!) daily emails: