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:
- This Common Artificial Sweetener Can Break Down DNA, Scientists Warn
- Sucralose Damages DNA, Linked to Leaky Gut
- Chemical found in common sweetener damages DNA
- Chemical found in widely used sweetener breaks up DNA
- Chemical from Splenda breaks up DNA
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:
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:
-
Sweet Potato vs Cassava – Which is Healthier?
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.
Our Verdict
When comparing sweet potato to cassava, we picked the sweet potato.
Why?
For any unfamiliar with cassava, it’s also called manioc or yuca/yucca, and it’s a tuber that can be used a lot like sweet potato. It’s popular in S. America, often in recipes that aren’t the healthiest (deep-fried chunky “cassava chips” are popular in Brazil, for example, and farofa, a flour made from cassava, is less healthy even than refined white flour from wheat), but today we’re going to judge it on its own merit—since after all, almost anything can be deep-fried and many things can be turned into flour, but it doesn’t mean we have to do that.
Let’s talk macros first: sweet potato has nearly 2x the protein, while cassava has nearly 2x the carbs. As for fiber to soften those carbs’ impact on our blood sugars, well, sweet potato has about 2x the fiber. All in all for macros, a clear and easy win for sweet potato.
Important note: as for the impact that has on glycemic index: the exact glycemic index will depend on what you do with it (different cooking methods change the GI), but broadly speaking, sweet potatoes are considered a medium GI food, while cassava is a very high GI food, to the point that it’s higher than sucrose, and nearly equal to pure glucose. Which is impressive, for a tuber.
In terms of vitamins, sweet potato’s famously high vitamin A content raises the bar, but it’s not all it has to offer: sweet potato has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, E, and K, while cassava has more of vitamins B9 and choline. Just for amusement’s sake, let’s note that the sweet potato has over 1,478x the vitamin A content. In any case, the vitamins category is another clear win for sweet potato.
When it comes to minerals, it’s again quite one-sided: sweet potato has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, and potassium, while cassava has more selenium. So, sweet potato wins yet again.
In short: definitely a case of “the less widely-available option is not necessarily the healthier”!
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Glycemic Index vs Glycemic Load vs Insulin Index
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Avocado vs Blueberries – Which is Healthier?
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.
Our Verdict
When comparing avocado to blueberries, we picked the avocado.
Why?
These two fruits aren’t as similar as some of the comparisons we’ve made—we often go for “can be used in the same way culinarily” comparisons. But! They are both popularly in the “superfood” category, so it’s interesting to consider:
In terms of macros, avocado has more protein, (healthy!) fat, and fiber, while blueberries have more carbs. An easy win for avocado here, unless you’re on a calorie-controlled diet perhaps, since avocado is also higher in those. About that fat; it’s mostly monounsaturated, with some polyunsaturated and saturated, and is famously a good source of omega-3 in the form of ALA.
In the category of vitamins, avocado has more of vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, B5, B6, B7, B9, C, E, K, and choline, while blueberries are not higher in any vitamins. So, not a tricky decision here.
When it comes to minerals, avocado has more calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, phosphorus, potassium, selenium, and zinc, while blueberries are higher in manganese. Another win for avocados.
There is one other category that’s important to consider in this case, and that’s polyphenols. We’d be here all day if we listed them all, but in total, blueberries have about 1193x the polyphenol content that avocados do. Blueberries got the reputation for antioxidant properties for a reason; it is well-deserved!
So, out of the two, we declare avocado the overall more nutritious of the two, but blueberries absolutely deserve the acclaim they get also.
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
Give Us This Day Our Daily Dozen
Take care!
Share This Post
-
Guinness Is Good For You*
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.
Guinness Is Good For You*
*This is our myth-buster edition, so maybe best not take that at face value!
To this day, writing the words “Guinness is” into Google will autocomplete to “Guinness is good for you”. The ad campaign proclaiming such launched about a hundred years ago, and was based on Guinness as it was when it was launched another hundred years before that.
Needless to say, none of this was based on modern science.
Is there any grain of truth?
Perhaps its strongest health claim, in terms of what stands up to modern scrutiny, is that it does contain some B vitamins. Famously (as it was once given to pregnant women in Ireland on the strength of such) it contains folate (also known as Vitamin B9). How much?
A 15oz glass of Guinness contains 12.8µg of folate, which is 3.2% of the RDA. In other words, you could get all the folate your body needs by drinking just 32 glasses of Guinness per day.
With that in mind, you might want to get the non-alcoholic version!
“I heard you could live on just Guinness and oranges, because it contains everything but vitamin C?”
The real question is: how long could you live? Otherwise, a facetious answer here could be akin to the “fun fact” that you can drink lava… once.
Guinness is missing many essential amino acids and fatty acids, several vitamins, and many minerals. Exactly what it’s missing may vary slightly from region to region, as while the broad recipe is the same, some processes add or remove some extra micronutrients.
As to what you’d die of first, for obvious reasons there have been no studies done on this, but our money would be on liver failure.
It would also wreak absolute havoc with your kidneys, but kidneys are tricky beasts—you can be down to 10% functionality and unaware that anything’s wrong yet. So we think liver failure would get you first.
(Need that 0.0% alcohol Guinness link again? Here it is)
Fun fact: Top contender in the category of “whole food” is actually seaweed (make sure you don’t get too much iodine, though)!
Or, should we say, top natural contender. Because foods that have been designed by humans to contain everything we need and more for optimized health, such as Huel, do exactly what they say on the tin.
And in case you’re curious…
Read: what bare minimum nutrients do you really need, to survive?
Share This Post
-
Gut-Healthy Labneh Orecchiette
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.
Labneh (a sort of yogurt-cheese made from strained yogurt) is a great probiotic, and there’s plenty of resistant starch in this dish too, from how we cook, cool, and reheat the pasta. Add to this the lycopene from the tomatoes, the ergothioneine from the mushrooms, and the healthful properties of the garlic, black pepper, and red chili, and we have a very healthy dish!
You will need
- 10 oz labneh (if you can’t buy it locally, you can make your own by straining Greek yogurt through a muslin cloth, suspended over a bowl to catch the water that drips out, overnight—and yes, plant-based is also fine if you are vegan, and the gut benefits are similar because unlike vegan cheese, vegan yogurt is still fermented)
- 6 oz wholegrain orecchiette (or other pasta, but this shape works well for this sauce)
- ¼ bulb garlic, grated
- Juice of ½ lemon
- Large handful chopped parsley
- Large handful chopped dill
- 9 oz cherry tomatoes, halved
- 9 oz mushrooms (your choice what kind), sliced (unless you went for shiitake or similar, which don’t need it due to already being very thin)
- 2 tsp black pepper, coarse ground
- 1 tsp red chili flakes
- ¼ tsp MSG or ½ tsp low-sodium salt
- Extra virgin olive oil
Method
(we suggest you read everything at least once before doing anything)
1) Cook the pasta as you normally would. Drain, and rinse with cold water. Set aside.
2) Combine the labneh with the garlic, black pepper, dill, parsley, and lemon juice, in a large bowl. Set aside.
3) Heat a little olive oil in a skillet; add the chili flakes, followed by the mushrooms. Cook until soft and browned, then add the tomatoes and fry for a further 1 minute—we want the tomatoes to be blistered, but not broken down. Stir in the MSG/salt, and take off the heat.
4) Refresh the pasta by passing a kettle of boiling water through it in a colander, then add the hot pasta to the bowl of labneh sauce, stirring to coat thoroughly.
5) Serve, spooning the mushrooms and tomatoes over the labneh pasta.
Enjoy!
Want to learn more?
For those interested in some of the science of what we have going on today:
- Making Friends With Your Gut (You Can Thank Us Later)
- Lycopene’s Benefits For The Gut, Heart, Brain, & More
- “The Longevity Vitamin” (That’s Not A Vitamin)
Take care!
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:
-
Spirulina vs Nori – Which is Healthier?
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.
Our Verdict
When comparing spirulina to nori, we picked the nori.
Why?
In the battle of the seaweeds, if spirulina is a superfood (and it is), then nori is a super-dooperfood. So today is one of those “a very nutritious food making another very nutritious food look bad by standing next to it” days. With that in mind…
In terms of macros, they’re close to identical. They’re both mostly water with protein, carbs, and fiber. Technically nori is higher in carbs, but we’re talking about 2.5g/100g difference.
In the category of vitamins, spirulina has more vitamin B1, while nori has a lot more of vitamins A, B2, B3, B5, B6, B9, C, E, K, and choline.
When it comes to minerals, it’s a little closer but still a clear win for nori; spirulina has more copper, iron, and magnesium, while nori has more calcium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, and zinc.
Want to try some nori? Here’s an example product on Amazon 😎
Want to learn more?
You might like to read:
21% Stronger Bones in a Year at 62? Yes, It’s Possible (No Calcium Supplements Needed!) ← nori was an important part of the diet enjoyed here
Take care!
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:
-
Is It Dementia?
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.
Spot The Signs (Because None Of Us Are Immune)
Dementia affects increasingly many people, and unlike a lot of diseases, it disproportionately affects people in wealthy industrialized nations.
There are two main reasons for this:
- Longevity (in poorer countries, more people die of other things sooner; can’t get age-related cognitive decline if you don’t age)
- Lifestyle (in the age of convenience, it has never been easier to live an unhealthy lifestyle)
The former is obviously no bad thing for those of us lucky enough to be in wealthier countries (though even in such places, good healthcare access is of course sadly not a given for all).
The latter, however, is less systemic and more epidemic. But it does cut both ways:
- An unhealthy lifestyle is much easier here, yes
- A healthier lifestyle is much easier here, too!
This then comes down to two factors in turn:
- Information: knowing about dementia, what things lead to it, what to look out for, what to do
- Motivation: priorities, and how much attention we choose to give this matter
So, let’s get some information, and then give it our attention!
More than just memory
It’s easy to focus on memory loss, but the four key disabilities directly caused by dementia (each person may not get all four), can be remembered by the mnemonic: “AAAA!”
No, somebody didn’t just murder your writer. It’s:
- Amnesia: memory loss, in one or more of its many forms
- e.g. short term memory loss, and/or inability to make new memories
- Aphasia: loss of ability to express oneself, and/or understand what is expressed
- e.g. “More people have been to Berlin than I have”
- Or even less communication-friendly, Broca’s (Expressive) Aphasia and Wernicke’s (Receptive) Aphasia
- Apraxia: loss of ability to do things, through no obvious physical disability
- e.g. staring at the bathroom mirror wondering how to brush one’s teeth
- Agnosia: loss of ability to recognize things
- e.g. prosopagnosia, also called face-blindness.
If any of those seem worryingly familiar, be aware that while yes, it could be a red flag, what’s most important is patterns of these things.
Another difference between having a momentary brainlapse and having dementia might be, for example, the difference between forgetting your keys, and forgetting what keys do or how to use one.
That said, some are neurological deficits that may show up quite unrelated to dementia, including most of those given as examples above. So if you have just one, then that’s probably worthy of note, but probably not dementia.
Writer’s anecdote: I have had prosopagnosia all my life. To give an example of what that is like and how it’s rather more than just “bad with faces”…
Recently I saw my neighbor, and I could tell something was wrong with her face, but I couldn’t put my finger on what it was. Then some moments later, I realized I had mistaken her hat for her face. It was a large beanie with a panda design on it, and that was facelike enough for me to find myself looking at the wrong face.
Subjective memory matters as much as objective
Objective memory tests are great indicators of potential cognitive decline (or improvement!), but even a subjective idea of having memory problems, that one’s memory is “not as good as it used to be”, can be an important indicator too:
Subjective memory may be marker for cognitive decline
And more recently:
If your memory feels like it’s not what it once was, it could point to a future dementia risk
If you’d like an objective test of memory and other cognitive impairments, here’s the industry’s gold standard test (it’s free):
SAGE: A Test to Detect Signs of Alzheimer’s and Dementia
(The Self-Administered Gerocognitive Exam (SAGE) is designed to detect early signs of cognitive, memory or thinking impairments)
There are things that can look like dementia that aren’t
A person with dementia may be unable to recognize their partner, but hey, this writer knows that feeling very well too. So what sets things apart?
More than we have room for today, but here’s a good overview:
What are the early signs of dementia, and how does it differ from normal aging?
Want to read more?
You might like our previous article more specifically about reducing Alzheimer’s risk:
Reducing Alzheimer’s Risk Early!
Take care!
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:
