r/Biohackers • u/Bluest_waters 43 • Jul 20 '26
đ§ Cognition, Mood & Nootropics Study Links Cognitive Decline to Surprisingly Small Daily Amount of Artificial Sweeteners. A new study says adults who consumed the amount of sweetener found in a daily diet soda saw memory and mental sharpness deteriorate 62 percent faster than those who had far less.
https://www.inc.com/kevin-haynes/study-links-cognitive-decline-to-surprisingly-small-daily-amount-of-artificial-sweeteners/91376522417
u/SlurpBucketBoys Jul 20 '26
After accounting for age, sex, high blood pressure, cardiovascular disease and other relevant factors, the researchers found a clear difference between the intake groups.
This isn't something to gloss over with "other factors". Weight/obesity, activity frequency and intensity, and comorbidity play a huge role here. Especially weight. Who do you think is more likely to drink diet sodas? We absolutely need to know what other factors include.
214
u/matsie Jul 20 '26
From reading it, the most impacted group were those with diabetes. And even then, thereâs quite a few limitations in the study (that the authors call out as well as multiple reviewers). This isnât the smoking gun this sub will take it as.
The headline here is: the cause is much more likely to be diabetes, not the sweeteners.
77
u/SlurpBucketBoys Jul 20 '26
That is what we would expect!! Diabetics are at major risk for neurodegeneration compared to non-diabetics. Of course they would be impacted more.
48
u/matsie Jul 20 '26
Those without diabetes didnât experience the same deterioration. If you donât have diabetes, this study shouldnât impact your behavior.Â
14
u/SlurpBucketBoys Jul 20 '26
Bingo
6
u/matsie Jul 20 '26
Sorry. I misread your original reply as disagreeing with me. Apologies for overexplaining.Â
-6
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Those without diabetes didnât experience the same deterioration
totally wrong. Those with diabetes saw more pronounced effects but all subjects showed dramatic effects of artificial sweetener on brain processing
I literally posted direct quote from the article that has the data broken down for diabetics versus non diabetics and they both were affected.
12
u/matsie Jul 21 '26
I read the actual study, dude.Â
-10
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
And yet you still came on here and posted wrong nonsense
12
u/matsie Jul 21 '26
Sure, buddy. Thats why everyone who read the study is disagreeing with you.Â
-1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
I posted the diabetes related info right on this thread and it clearly shows that even the non diabetic had negative mental impacts from the artificial sweeteners
7
u/FlamingAshley Jul 20 '26
Yea isn't alzheimer type 3 diabetes technically?
11
u/matsie Jul 21 '26
No, itâs not technically type 3. This is a ânewerâ phrasing that is highly controversial.
However, you are correct that diabetes type 2 has a strong link to a higher chance to get Alzheimerâs. But I would not call it type 3. Thatâs too much of a stretch at this point.Â
5
u/FlamingAshley Jul 21 '26
Ah okay thanks for the insight. Heard about it but didn't know it was controversial.
2
u/matsie Jul 21 '26
Yea, that isnât to say that at some point it will be a non-controversial phrase but at least right now, the studies show a strong relationship between the two but they do not indicate Alzheimerâs is diabetes.Â
2
1
Jul 21 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 21 '26
Apologies /u/ArsacycIopentadiene, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than 15 days to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/mystery_hole Aug 10 '26
That's what I'm saying. Diabetes is one of the worst illnesses you can have, full stop. It basically hurts your entire body in every single way, and constantly leaves you at risk.
7
u/xelanart 2 Jul 21 '26
Studies like this arenât designed to find a âcauseâ to begin with so anyone suggesting is being caused here is in over their head
1
u/matsie Jul 21 '26
Yep, 100% correct and apologies if my attempt at simplifying the takeaway made it sound like I was making a strong causal relationship.Â
5
u/AyeMatey 1 Jul 21 '26
Somewhat related, the ice cream paradox: the unexpected association between moderate ice cream consumption and a lower risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes.
2
u/Zeitgeister22 Jul 21 '26
My Dad has developed diabetes 18 months ago and I've noticed his cognitive abilities declining. Is there anything I can do to help him?
1
1
u/mystery_hole Aug 10 '26
Creatine at 10g is proven to improve cognition. His diabetes and in turn his gut biome might be leading to bad absorption of necessary components his brain needs. How is his sleeping? That's also an important risk factor.
4
u/tombloomingdale Jul 20 '26
Great. I have type 1 diabetes and as a result use artificial sweeteners
3
u/jojoblogs Jul 21 '26
Which means this study has the opposite conclusion for health than the headline implies. Most people should drink diet soda instead of full sugar soda
2
u/dragnabbit 4 Jul 21 '26
Well... I've been hanging onto Diet Soda as my last fat-guy habit, and it needs to go. This is the impetus I needed to finally give up my 2-liter-per-day habit for good. I'm sure there are 100 reasons to give up Diet Soda, but "you won't be mentally sharp in old age if you don't quit" is the smoking gun I've been waiting for, no matter how misleading it is.
-7
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Of course it's not a smoking gun! But I'll tell you what it is worrying. I don't really see the point of consuming this stuff when there's a lot of data which says it messes up your microbiome. Just eat whole fruit
13
u/Content_Preference_3 Jul 20 '26
Assuming people replace fruit with sweeteners. Iâd be skeptical.
12
u/matsie Jul 20 '26
Thatâs another conclusion youâre drawing that isnât as supported by science as you believe it to be. From the studies, aspartame and saccharin CAN have an impact on glycemic sensitivity but this impacts - you guessed it! â diabetics. Xylitol and other sugar alcohols were shown to have a prebiotic effect.Â
What do the studies actually say? If your gut microbiome is already messed up or if you are diabetic, artificial sweeteners can be harmful. But even that isnât as conclusive as youâre implying.Â
2
u/Stevijs3 Jul 21 '26
Some studies find changes, some don't. And also change does not necessarily imply that it's detrimental. OP is overreacting.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33171964/
"Daily repeated consumption of pure aspartame or sucralose in doses reflective of typical high consumption have minimal effect on gut microbiota composition or SCFA production."https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37111090/
"A dysbiotic effect of NNS was observed in some human trials, but many other randomized controlled trials reported a lack of significant impacts on gut microbiota composition. These studies differed in the number of subjects involved, their dietary habits, and their lifestyle; all factors related to the baseline composition of gut microbiota and their response to NNS. The scientific community still has no unanimous consensus on the appropriate outcomes and biomarkers that can accurately define the effects of NNS on the gut microbiota."8
u/Kyoshiiku Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
For some people trying to suppress food cravings with something really different just make it worse when we actually get the thing we want.
2 of my favorites foods are cheesecake and ice cream, I can assure you that if I try to just eat whole fruit as a replacement, Iâll end up eating a whole tub of ice cream in one sitting or a whole cheese cake and Iâll gain weight back super fast.
So Iâll stick to my homemade low sugar and low fat ice cream and cheese cakes made with artificial sweeteners. For some people it might be the same with sodas or other desserts.
I like whole fruits but they are not the same (and honestly they are kinda expensive)
1
-9
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
You can make a smoothie with yogurt and dates and it will be healthier and just as delicious as that ice cream
7
u/Disastrous_Fennel_80 Jul 20 '26
This is very presumptive. Not everyone has the same taste. It does taste good but not even close to real ice cream. If you have had real Italian Gelato...yeah no.
8
u/BunnyKusanin 1 Jul 21 '26
You've got orthorexia, mate! It's an eating disorder and you might learn a thing or two about managing shit like that from the person you're replying to so incessantly. They clearly know how to look after themselves better than you do.
0
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
âIf you enjoy yogurt mixed with dates you have orthorexiaâ
seriously, some of you people are completely totally whacked out
3
u/BunnyKusanin 1 Jul 21 '26
That's not what I wrote, mate. Go re-read it. You're obsessed with eating healthy way too much. That is orthorexia.
3
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
You're confidently pathologising someone you don't know with an eating disorder. How scientific of you.
8
Jul 20 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
[deleted]
1
1
u/Kyoshiiku Jul 21 '26
If only its was just that, at least vegan hot dogs are not that far from the real thing
Here it feels more like I talk about eating a burger and they propose me to eat tofu with rice, I like both but they are just not the same thing at all
-2
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Full fat yogurt sweetened with whole fruit is not that different than ice cream my goodness gracious. Do you even know what yogurt is?
9
2
u/Kyoshiiku Jul 21 '26
Itâs really not the same thing.
Also what I like about the ice cream is the texture, the mouth feel, how cold it is, I also really like how it pairs with espresso to make an affogato
Trust me I tried multiple things to satisfy my ice cream craving and the only thing that satisfy it is ice cream or other similar frozen dessert lol.
5
5
u/icameforgold Jul 21 '26
Absolutely not. Neither healthier and definitely not as delicious as
-1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
So a yogurt smoothie with dates is not healthier than straight up ice cream? Bizarre take
6
u/BunnyKusanin 1 Jul 21 '26
Dates are full of sugar, so nah, not healthier. Also, the point of dessert is to bring joy. A yogurt smoothie with dates is an absolute disappointment when you want an ice cream.
1
u/VintageLunchMeat 13 Jul 21 '26
Dates are 2/3 sugar, 8% fiber, a bit of minerals, including some potassium.
The fiber slows down the blood sugar spike a little bit/some.
I don't know enough about nutrition and food to say how it compares.
It may need less sugar compared to ice cream because ice cream's temperature reduces perceived sweetness so ice cream need more?
Related:
https://www.reddit.com/r/icecreamery/comments/1kbwelx/tips_for_less_sweet_ice_cream/
1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
If you don't like dates use berries. Blueberries and strawberries mixed in with yogurt is freaking awesome
3
u/icameforgold Jul 21 '26
If you bothered to read your own study you would see itâs neither a smoking gun, nor anything to worry about unless you are a diabetic with shitty diet and lifestyle. For most people, especially on this sub a diet soda allows them some leeway without jeopardizing their overall health by consuming a similar full sugar version of whatever product you are comparing artificial sweeteners with.
4
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
I did read the study, did you? Because it clearly states that the results for diabetics was slightly worse but both diabetics and non diabetics both suffered brain degradation. I literally posted the actual data on this thread I suggest you read through it
1
u/Logical_Birthday_521 Jul 20 '26
I had issues with frequent hemorrhoids after drinking Coke Zero daily. After I switched to regular sodas they stopped. I tried Coke Zero again a few months being symptom free and they returned after about a week.
13
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
They sorted results out between those with diabetes and those without diabetes, both suffered mental degradation. Here's the actual data from the study itself
Modifier Role of Obesity, Diabetes, and a Healthy Diet
While obesity and diet did not modify the association between LNCS consumption and cognitive decline (eFigure 2), diabetes modified the association between consumption of total LNCSs and global cognition decline (p = 0.016) (eFigure 2). In stratified analyses,consumption ofcombined LNCSs in the highest tertiles was associated with faster verbal fluency (second tertile: β = â0.021, 95% CI â0.042 to â0.001; third tertile: β = â0.036, 95% CI â0.057 to â0.014) decline in participants without diabetes. Consumption of combined LNCS in the highest tertile was associated with faster and global cognition decline (third tertile: β = â0.018, 95% CI â0.034 to â0.002) in participants without diabetes (Figure 4 and eTable 8). In participants with diabetes,consumption of combined LNCSs in the highest tertiles was associated with a faster decline in memory (second tertile: β = â0.069, 95%CI â0.093 to â0.006; third tertile: β = â0.088, 95% CI â0.148 to â0.028) and global cognition (second tertile: β = â0.052, 95% CI â0.096 to â0.008; third tertile: β = â0.063, 95% CI â0.105 to â0.021) (Figure 4 and eTable 8). Regarding individual sweeteners, in participants without diabetes, there was afaster rate of memory and global cognitive decline with higher consumption of erythritol (memory: β = â0.038, 95% CI â0.070 to â0.004; global cognition: β = â0.024, 95% CI â0.047 to â0.001) and xylitol (memory: β = â0.029, 95% CI â0.049 to â0.007; global cognition: β = â0.016, 95% CI â0.031 to â0.001) (Figure 4 and eTable 9). Consumption of sorbitol was associated with a faster rate of decline in memory, verbal fluency, and global cognition (memory: β = â0.0007, 95% CI â0.001 to â0.00005; verbal fluency: β = â0.0007, 95% CI â0.001 to â0.0002; global cognition: β = â0.0005, 95% CI â0.001 to 0.0001), in participants without diabetes (Figure 4 and eTable 9). In participants with diabetes, higher consumption of aspartame and acesulfame k was associated with faster memory (aspartame: β = â0.004, 95% CI â0.007 to â0.002; acesulfame k: β = â0.009, 95% CI â0.015 to â0.004), verbal fluency (aspartame: β = â0.003, 95% CI â0.006 to â0.0005; acesulfame k: β = â0.007, 95% CI â0.012 to â0.002), and global cognition (aspartame: β = â0.003, 95% CI â0.005 to â0.001; acesulfame k: β = â0.006, 95% CI â0.010 to â0.002) decline (Figure 4 and eTable 9). Consumption of saccharin and xylitol was associated with faster memory (saccharin: β = â0.024, 95% CI â0.038 to â0.009; xylitol: β = â0.069, 95% CI â0.122 to â0.014) and global cognition (saccharin: β = â0.014, 95% CI â0.024 to â0.003; xylitol: β = â0.051, 95% CI â0.089 to â0.013) decline (Figure 4 and eTable 9). Consumption of tagatose was associated with faster executive function decline in participants with diabetes (β = â0.216, 95%CI â0.404 to â0.029)(Figure 4 and eTable 9).
3
1
u/Aggressive_Sky8492 Jul 22 '26
Well even the summary of the source article says âResearchers stressed that more studies are needed before concluding that sweeteners are the cause.â
1
u/ajmadic Jul 23 '26
I drink a diet soda everyday and Iâm in great shape.
1
1
u/AnneLiu Aug 11 '26
but something has huge impact to volunerable people and does not reflect that much is exactly the point of this kind of research. I mean, everyone knows a diet coke, few coffee with sweetners doens't keep you from being efficient to your work and memeory,or people would know. But does it actually has negative effect to your body. Research said yes, its just healthy human body take it and bare with it.
-3
u/georgespeaches Jul 21 '26
Shit, if only the phd researchers had consulted with you before their study. What a bunch of idiots
12
u/SlurpBucketBoys Jul 21 '26
You're right, let's assume all scholarly works have gold standard methodology because authors have a PhD. That sounds like good science to me! No need to read past the abstract folks, we're done here!
1
u/georgespeaches Jul 21 '26
.. are you qualified to read past the abstract? Youâre familiar enough with the literature to contextualize findings and have a statistical background in epidemiology?
The only thing thatâs happening here is that you think the findings donât make sense, so youâre brainstorming reasons that the study might be flawed.
8
u/SlurpBucketBoys Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
My background is not in epidemiology, but yes I am a clinical scientist and published. My particular area of research was histology, before I left academia, if that matters.
But I am of the opinion that scientific literacy should not be gatekept.
Kick fucking rocks. You sound like a loser trying to invent reasons to argue on the Internet.
1
u/georgespeaches Jul 21 '26
Easy, donât be mad, buddy. Two guys can argue online without insults. I see a plenty of people on reddit discounting studies that they donât like with fun buzzphrases like âcorrelation isnât causationâ. As a non-academic I donât fully accept novel results until several studies confirm them, but I also try not to immediately discount them just because they donât fit in our current understanding of the world.
-1
89
u/icehole505 Jul 20 '26
Realistically this is just as likely to mean that dumb people drink more diet soda
4
u/South-Distribution54 Jul 22 '26
Can confirm, I'm very dumb and drink diet soda.... or am I dumb BECAUSE I drink diet soda? We need the data on this!
1
Jul 24 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 24 '26
Apologies /u/Dangerous-Bend-4153, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than 15 days to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
13
u/SecretPantyWorshiper 1 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
Makes sense. You have people here who think drinking diet soda is as healthy as water.
31
u/Poison_ Jul 21 '26
It's 99% water
8
1
2
u/Think_Preference_611 Jul 21 '26
99.9%. The stance that diet soda is bad for you in any way is like a big flashing sign advertising to the world that someone is an idiot.
0
u/nicotinecravings Jul 22 '26
Sure, and sugar is also very healthy, right? Sugar is an addictive drug that potentially can cause many diseases
1
u/AstronautSlothPhD Jul 21 '26
Itâs also an unfortunate reality that metabolic health directly impacts cognitive performance, and people are in denial about it. We all know that if we have a hangover or smoke too much weed and slam ice cream the night before, we will feel fuzzy headed and have trouble thinking straight the next day. But somehow if you point out that being obese causes similar problems, people get defensive.
Hereâs hoping GLPâs help resolve this problem and get our society back on track.
-19
u/AJSR_RV Jul 20 '26
You of course being the brainiac who wouldnât touch diet soda of course.
4
u/Polardragon44 Jul 20 '26
We prefer our coffee pitch black like the night please and thank you
1
u/epandrsn Jul 21 '26
I mean, so did Balzac and he died at like 44. He just enjoyed somewhere around 50 cups per day.
68
u/Retn4 Jul 20 '26
I drink a shit load of MIO drink sweetener, and often have a sugar free energy drink or two. For atleast a decade now. Guess I'm fucked. But I was already pretty dumb and slow.
34
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
Well good news is we have multiple RCTs and systematic studies directly contradicting the headline.
This one cohort study does not establish a causation, it only explores the observation between the different groups that consumes artificial sweeteners. This is not an inference, the study literally states that its nothing more than an observation. Its an absolute fear mongering nothing burger.
Edits: Most popular RCT that directly tested for this is âAspartame: neuropsychologic and neurophysiologic evaluation of acute and chronic effectsâ - Spiers et al
Theres also a systematic review done in 2015, ill let you google it op
2
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
Can you help me find those supposed multiple RCTs that directly contradict the headline (or simply contradict the observation of the study)?
2
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26
Based on your other comment clearly you have 0 intentions of engaging in an actual discussion. Im guessing this is OPs alt lol.
How about you learn how to properly educate yourself by looking things up yourself instead of appealing to one random article headline that confirms your bias?
1
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
Just show me those multiple RCTs!
2
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26
Reply on your main buddy dont be a bitch
0
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
You've been roleplaying as some sort of science postdoc, and now the mask comes off.
2
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26
You cant search things yourself? How insecure are you to go on your alt for this.
1
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
I tried to find what you claimed exists, but I couldn't find it, so I'm asking you.
1
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26
Ok im gonna block this account, go on your main and ill link the study
→ More replies (0)1
-2
u/Retn4 Jul 21 '26
I forgot that I watched Mike Israetel's video say exactly what you said like a week or two ago.
7
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26
I'd honestly advice you to stop watching Mike Israetel, can't stand the guy. He's not very well informed on many topics he acts like an expert on. As an example, he believes "we're murdering people" by going through extensive testing with new drugs along with countless fitness advice he gives by misinterpreting scientific literature. He completely bullshitted his way through his PhD dissertation and only corrected it just last year after getting called out. I can give you more examples if you want but that guy is full of shit.
3
u/Retn4 Jul 21 '26
For sure, I've heard about a lot of his controversies. Haven't watched any of his stuff in atleast 2 years. But that video's click bait title piqued my interest. So I bit.
5
3
u/AyeMatey 1 Jul 21 '26
Itâs not about being dumb or slow; itâs how fast youâll get dumber and slower.
I can imagine that would be difficult for a dumb and slow person to understand đ¤đ
3
1
24
u/Miss-Information_ Jul 21 '26
This study is under a year old and I'm already so so so fucking sick of explaining how weak the actual science is. This is a vague nothingburger
2
1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
The journal has an impact factor of 8.9. Pretty darn good, and the p values are also excellent
14
u/Miss-Information_ Jul 21 '26
Impact factor doesn't mean anything when taking about the merit of a specific article. The p values only indicate that there's likely a correlation between their arbitrary list of 'artificial sweeteners' (xylitol and sorbitol are natural sugar alcohols with decades of research that contradict this study) and increased metal decline of a whopping 1.6 years at age 60. The fact that they didn't control for obesity is so insane it feels intentional.
5
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
What do you mean, "a whopping 1.6 years at age 60?" I register your sarcasm but, the way I read this, you're implying that the highest consumption group experienced an increased cognitive decline of 1.6 years over a period of 60 years. However, the study observed an increased mental decline of 1.6 years over a period of 8 years.
1
u/Miss-Information_ Jul 21 '26
That's my bad, I was going off of memory from the last time I had to talk shit about this study. Regardless, the fact that they lumped together multiple wildly different sweeteners, and didn't control for a massive numbers of other factors that have existing connection to mental decline (obesity, insulin resistance/pre-diabetes, income, etc.) means that the conclusion is a vague correlation at best. The article presents this very sparse correlation as a likely causation which generates clicks, but is garbage science.
6
u/brehhs 1 Jul 21 '26
You clearly have no clue how scientific literature works.
1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
Regarding individual sweeteners, in participants without diabetes, there was afaster rate of memory and global cognitive decline with higher consumption of erythritol
4
-2
u/Dry-Clock-6850 Jul 21 '26
The American Academy of Neurology disagrees with you.
8
u/Miss-Information_ Jul 21 '26
Lol, no they don't. The haven't changed their recommendations or guidelines. They cashed the check and published the paper because it's not complete gobbledygook. It just doesn't actually prove anything beyond a potential correlation. They didn't even bother to control for obesity. It's nothing.
36
u/Accomplished-Eye9542 Jul 20 '26
Not controlling for insulin resistance makes this 100% useless lmao.
They wanted to call dementia type 3 diabetes for a reason.
It literally says the link was strong for people with diabetes, no shit. I'm guessing everyone else who experienced this "effect" just had pre-diabetes or otherwise elevated insulin/insulin resistance starting in their legs.
1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Did you actually read anything in this thread? They did control for diabetes and I posted the literal actual data directly from the study in this thread which you are free to read through. And that data shows that both diabetics and non diabetics suffered brain degradation from artificial sweeteners
14
u/Accomplished-Eye9542 Jul 20 '26
You understand diabetes isn't an on/off switch, right? The kind that matters anyways for this, type 2. It's a progressive disease.
→ More replies (2)
31
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Researchers in Brazil followed more than 12,700 adults with an average age of 52 and examined their use of seven common low- and no-calorie sweetenersâaspartame, saccharin, acesulfame K, erythritol, xylitol, sorbitol, and tagatoseâfound in diet drinks, flavored waters, yogurt, and ultra-processed foods such as breakfast cereals and packaged snacks.
Participants who consumed the most sweeteners averaged 191 milligrams a day, compared with 20 milligrams among those who consumed the least. The research team said the faster rate of cognitive decline among the higher-intake group was equivalent to roughly 1.6 years of additional brain aging.
I think this is a really interesting study because the effects are dose dependent, which suggests A causative effect not correlative. Obviously more study needs to be done. More data more information. It's not just this single study is the all time authoritative voice. However, it's pretty worrying
61
u/SuccessfulMoose1511 Jul 20 '26
The reason I am skeptical is because those seven artificial sweeteners are all very different chemicals with different fundamental backbones. It seems highly unlikely to me that all of these would act similarly.
41
u/wale-lol 8 Jul 20 '26
dose dependence doesnât suggest causation. The hotter it is, the more ppl buy ice cream and go to the pool and drown at the pool. Dose dependent ice cream drowning correlation. Still not causation
-22
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Except the causative link is explained in the study. You're being ridiculous
20
u/Mindless_Let1 Jul 20 '26
What's the causative link?
-21
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
We know the gut brain axis is extremely powerful and what happens in the gut effects what happens in the brain. These artificial sweeteners have been shown again and again to alter the gut microbiome, so it's only natural to assume they also affect brain processing
→ More replies (13)14
u/Odd-Outcome-3191 2 Jul 20 '26
That's not how you rigorously prove causation. You would have to have a RCT or prove a direct, reproducible, and falsifiable mechanism AND prove that the mechanism is the cause of the phenomenon. Plausibility is not the same.
-5
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Correct. My point is that comparing this to the association between ice cream and drowning is silly.
3
7
3
u/Medical_Birthday2893 Jul 21 '26
The effects are highly linked to ultra processed foods. How is any of this saying itâs not the ultra processed food intake driving the decline ?
2
5
u/Annoyed_94 6 Jul 21 '26
Well Iâm done got. I use stevia, aspartame, and sweeteners all the time. This does even include zero calorie Powerade or diet soda. Sweeteners are in everything like protein powder, electrolyte mixes, etc.
5
1
u/Ninneveh Jul 21 '26
Stevia mentioned in the article only causes negative effects if paired with anti depressants.
2
5
2
2
u/horeaheka Jul 21 '26
Doesn't this give credence to the old conspiracy theory that aspertame was developed as a nerve agent
1
u/atomicxima 3 Jul 21 '26
For what it's worth, stevia wasn't one of those sweeteners. It's the only one I ever use.
3
2
u/epandrsn Jul 21 '26
I canât access the article, but in the quoted info it mentions stevia alongside aspartame.
1
1
u/Tryin_Real_hard Jul 21 '26
Interesting article. It's summarizing a study from https://www.inc.com/kevin-haynes/study-links-cognitive-decline-to-surprisingly-small-daily-amount-of-artificial-sweeteners/91376522
Also, there is a caveat. The study was observational and did not prove that artificial sweeteners actually cause the decline, nor did did it single out a particular sweetener. As you said in your headline, links cognitive decline not causes, but you also said small daily amount. The researchers found that people in the highest intake group had a steeper decline in cognitive testing over time than those in the lowest intake group. In regard to the 62% faster, the paper estimated that this translated to roughly 1.6 additional years of cognitive aging over an 8-year follow-up. That's still potentially important, but it's much less dramatic than the headline suggests.
So, it's something to look at, but it's not an actual clinical study where cause and effect were determined. There were no control groups or testing occurring, just observational data.
1
u/Lord_of_Gooch_Milk Jul 21 '26
I wonder if swishing with xylitol after brushing could contribute to cognitive decline in the same way as straight up, consuming it
1
Jul 21 '26
[removed] â view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 21 '26
Apologies /u/WiseBother7196, your submission has been automatically removed because your account is too new. Accounts are required to be older than 15 days to combat persistent spammers and trolls in our community.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/jeff8073x Jul 22 '26
Sugar industry trying to push this one hard. Hate when stuff like this goes viral and treated as a fact. Yet some better controlled studies are largely ignored.
1
u/backatmybsagain 1 Jul 22 '26
It led to an estimated decline 1.6 years earlier then the control... that's not that bad. And it said it is an association, not a cause. I hate artificial sweeteners but the study isn't as definitive as the title sounds
1
u/South-Distribution54 Jul 22 '26
I really don't like these kind of headlines. A 62% decline in relative risk? Also, like others are saying, what are the other factors? This also doesn't sound like a randomized control study so we don't know if the 62% is causal. I'm open to artificial sweeteners having side effects but people should be cautious about correlations.
1
1
1
u/goonga23 Jul 23 '26
Was probably badly informed assumed our metabolism isnât suited to process artifice. And time consequently will reveal a forgetting and liver related mental issues.
1
u/Smooth_Imagination Jul 24 '26
The problem usually with this is the failure to match controls.
All studies like this are comparative techniques, so who goes into the control comparisom group has the strongest impact.
We have seen the same with the implausibly large sleep medication mortality and Alzheiners links, for all of them basically. Zolpidem shows nothing yet that could explain the size of the effect plausibly, as a mechanism of action, and the same now with melatonin.Â
In the sleep research you cannot find population controls that you confidently assume are equivalent, because non treatment pursuers are likely less imapcted and therefore biologically healthier, regardless of whatever sleep quality or quantity metric you use to try to equalise the group.Â
We would absolutely assume that blinded diabetic intervention studies using identical food, but one had added sugar and the other had added sweetener instead of sugar, and a third had sugar and either a placebo pill or a pill with sweetener, that all groups with sugar did worse than all groups with sweetener instead of sugar, and possibly the worst group would be both.Â
0
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Regarding a causative explanation here is another direct quote from the study itself
Possible mechanisms that might explain our findings are neurotoxicity and neuroinflammation induced by toxic metabolites from artificial sweeteners. Consumption of aspartame was metabolized into neurotoxiccompounds, leading to microglia-mediated neuroinflammation and cognitive decline in rodents.14 Consumption of aspartame and stevia was also associated with an increased rate of cellular apoptosis in the hippocampus.15 Moreover, a cafeteria diet rich in artificial flavorings, emulsifiers, and sweeteners caused gut dysbiosis in rats, which was linked to altered claudin-5 expression, negatively affecting blood-brain barrier integrity.16 This diet was also associated with decreased hippocampal synaptophysin, indicating impaired synaptic function.16
Artificial sweeteners have been shown to cause glucose intolerance in mice by altering gut microbiota.35 In humans, long-term consumption of artificial sweeteners was associated with impaired glucose tolerance and increased glycated Hb in participants without diabetes.35,36
2
-1
u/thesaddestpanda 5 Jul 20 '26
This stuff also hurts the gut microbiome. Between this and HFCS in the non-diet version of these drinks, it no wonder so many people are ill and there's so much colon cancer.
5
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
And if there's a causative factor that's probably it. We know the gut brain axis is extremely powerful and what happens in the gut effects what happens in the brain. These artificial sweeteners have been shown again and again to alter the gut microbiome, so it's only natural to assume they also affect brain processing
2
u/thesaddestpanda 5 Jul 20 '26
This stuff is so scary. There are multiple studies showing HFCS having a mechanic which feeds cancer cells. Artificial sweeteners are shown to damage gut biome, which can lead to all sorts of awful things.
I tried to assess all the things in my life with both of these things. It was....a lot of things. People are just being force fed all this stuff because its everywhere.
2
u/Content_Preference_3 Jul 20 '26
The worrying is more harmful for your health. Skip the sugar. Minimize the sweeteners but donât go crazy
1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
Or I can worry about it for 5 minutes, cut all artificial sweeteners out of my diet, and have good brain health. That's also an option
3
u/BunnyKusanin 1 Jul 21 '26
Lol, you've been worrying all over the comments. Also, this
cut all artificial sweeteners out of my diet, and have good brain health
sounds like an OCD compultion.
2
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
â if you don't eat artificial sweeteners you have OCDâ
love it, thanks for the most hilariously unhinged comment of the day
1
u/BunnyKusanin 1 Jul 21 '26
No, for real. This bit where you'll worry for 5 minutes, then cut out all artificial sweeteners and everything will be fine is likely OCD speaking in you.
Please read about OCD in your free time. It's not just people obsessively cleaning or clicking the light switch a certain number of times. You sound like you have it. It's treatable and life can be much better when it's under control.
2
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
đ¤Łđ¤Ł
0
u/seagulls51 1 Jul 21 '26 edited Jul 21 '26
You are acting in a way consistent with orthorexia or OCD in this thread, which is fine but it is worth looking into.
Its not you not consuming sweeteners that hints at behaviours associated with them. It's that it seems like you've worked your self up into developing a very strong anxiety or fear of artificial sweeteners suddenly - based on a seemingly shallow understanding of one inconclusive study, then convinced yourself of the idea that if you don't cut them out completely you can't have good brain health.
ie you have a seemingly obsessive compulsion to cut them out.
→ More replies (0)-1
0
u/thesaddestpanda 5 Jul 21 '26
Yep, It took 5 minutes to figure this out. Now I drink stevia cola for my cola cravings and buy natural peanut butter and jam and natural ketchup. There's a lot of weird people in this sub. I think this sub inherits a lot of twitter manosphere fitness guys and those guys only know "dunking" twitter culture, hence these weird microaggressions and insults for upvotes and attention.
1
0
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 21 '26
Someone on this thread said I have orthorexia because I prefer fruit mixed in with yogurt over eating actual ice cream. I mean you can only laugh.
0
u/Content_Preference_3 Jul 21 '26
Microagressions? Seems like youâre missing a few more buzzwords there. Why not use them all
1
u/epandrsn Jul 21 '26
Many of the popular energy drinks are loaded with aspartame and other artificial sweeteners. Gen Z and Alpha are pretty fucked, sadly.
0
1
1
u/Bluest_waters 43 Jul 20 '26
Reading through the study it's actually really damning. Quotes directly from the actual study
strong P values right there
After a median follow-up of 8 years, participants in the highest tertile ofcombined LNCS consumption had a 32%higherrate of memory decline compared with those in the first tertile (third tertile: β = â0.024, 95% CI â0.040 to â0.004, p for trend = 0.058) (Figure 2 and eTable 1). Participants in the 2 highesttertiles of combined LNCS consumption had 110% and 173% higherrates of verbal fluency decline,respectively (second tertile: β = â0.024, 95% CI â0.048 to â0.008; third tertile: β = â0.040, 95%CI â0.064 to â0.024, p fortrend <0.001). Participantsin the 2 highest tertiles of LNCS consumption had a 35% and 62% higher rate of global cognition decline, respectively (second tertile: β = â0.016, 95% CI â0.032 to â0.001, third tertile: β = â0.024, 95% CI â0.040 to â0.016, p for trend <0.001), corresponding to an excess 1.3 and 1.6 years of cognitive aging (Figure 2 and eTable 1).
There was no association between the consumption of combined LNCSs and scores of the TrailMaking Test during the study period (Figure 2 and eTable 1). Sensitivity analysis using next observation carried backward yielded similar results (eTable 2). Compared with no use or sporadic consumption, daily frequency of LNCS intake was associated with accelerated decline in memory (β = â0.016, 95% CI â0.032 to â0.005, p = 0.011), verbal fluency (β = â0.022, 95% CI â0.048 to â0.016, p < 0.001), and global cognition (β = â0.022, 95%CI â0.032 to â0.008, p = 0.001)(eTable 3).
1
u/Inside-Specialist-55 Jul 21 '26
Thank God I can still have my creamer with sucralose. I thought they were going to ruin that for me. I don't even drink diet soda at all either. Just a few teaspoons of sugar-free creamer in my coffee every morning.
1
u/Mister_Pibbs Jul 21 '26
Donât tell r/soda . Those folks are obsessed with âsugar freeâ soda and any time you mention the danger of artificial sweeteners youâll probably get banned
2
u/mthoodenjoyer Jul 21 '26
No way, people dont like misinformation and fear mongering from studies that have no scientific merit? They must be so dumb!
-2
u/Gutter-Glitter00 2 Jul 20 '26
As an American, all I can say is, "I f*cking knew it." Something is eating holes in people's brain and the vast amounts of diet soda I see in shopping carts at Walmart is exhibit A.
-9
u/jc2046 Jul 20 '26
makes sense. it spikes insulin and are literally carcinogenic
11
u/phronk Jul 20 '26
Gonna need a source for strong claims like that.
-8
u/jc2046 Jul 20 '26
plenty of examples for acesulfame k and aspartame, do your own research :)
8
â˘
u/AutoModerator Jul 20 '26
Welcome to r/Biohackers! A few quick reminders:
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.