Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Journal of Health and Allied Sciences NU 2012; 02(03): 80-84
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1709358
Review Article

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF DIABETOGENIC AND MUTAGENIC POTENTIAL OF ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS - ASPARTAME, ACESULFAME-K AND SUCRALOSE

Shastry C. S.
1   Department of Pharmacology, N.G.S.M. Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Paneer, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka - 575 018. India
,
Yatheesh C. K.
1   Department of Pharmacology, N.G.S.M. Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Paneer, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka - 575 018. India
,
Aswathanarayana B. J.
1   Department of Pharmacology, N.G.S.M. Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Paneer, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka - 575 018. India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objectives: Artificial sweeteners provide the sweetness of sugar without calories. Since from discovery, safety of artificial sweeteners has been controversial as they directly or indirectly link to induce carcinogenic and genotoxic risks. Hence the present study was undertaken to compare the diabetogenic and mutagenic potential of most widely using artificial sweeteners; aspartame, acesulfame-K, and sucralose.

Methods: Diabetic potential is assessed by ascending repeated dose study in which acceptable daily intake (ADI) dose of artificial sweeteners after converting human dose to animal dose using a standard reference table and administered up to 13 weeks with 3 different phases in an ascending manner on experimental rats. Mutagenic potential was accessed by Ames test with and without metabolic activation using Salmonella typhimurium strains TA 97 and TA1535.

Results: At ADI doses between 0-3 weeks, no significant changes but after 13 weeks significant increase was observed in the levels of fasting blood glucose, glycated haemoglobin, total cholesterol, triglyceride, LDL and VLDL in all artificial sweetener groups. Sucralose showed comparatively less increase which was supported by histology reports. In Ames mutagenic assay aspartame, acesulfame-K and sucralose gave negative results.

Conclusion: Aspartame, acesulfame-K and sucralose were found to exhibit diabetogenic effect at higher dose levels but they were safer to use at ADI doses and non mutagenic compounds. Comparatively sucralose is safer than aspartame and acesulfame-K. Hence these artificial sweeteners should be used with caution and over usage is not appreciated.

Keywords

Artificial sweeteners - aspartame - acesulfame-K, sucralose - diabetogenic - mutagenic


Publication History

Article published online:
04 May 2020

© .

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Erina EVH. Artificial Sweeteners: their origin and mechanism. Cited on 2009. Available from: URL:www.clfs.umd.edu/grad/mlfsc/Artificial%20Sweeteners.pdf
  • 2 Duffy VB, Grant SM. Position of the american dietetic association: use of nutritive and nonnutritive sweeteners. J Am Diet Assoc 2004;104(2):255–75.
  • 3 Tripathi BK, Srivastava AK. Diabetes mellitus: complications and therapeutics. Med Sci Monit 2006;12(7):130-47.
  • 4 Nettleton JA, Lutsey PL, Wang Y, Lima JA, Michos ED, Jacobs DR. Diet soda intake and risk of incident metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes in the multi-ethnic study of atherosclerosis (MESA). Diabetes Care 2009;32(4):688–9.
  • 5 Fowler SP, Williams K, Resendez RG, Hunt KJ, Hazuda HP, Stern MP. Fueling the obesity epidemic? artificially sweetened beverage use and long-term weight gain. Obesity 2008;16(8):1894.
  • 6 Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Esposti DD, Lambertini L, Tibaldi E, Rigano A. First experimental demonstration of the multipotential carcinogenic effects of aspartame administered in the feed to sprague-dawley rats. Environ Health Perspect 2006;114:379-85.
  • 7 Soffritti M, Belpoggi F, Esposti DD, Tibaldi E, Lauriola M. 2007. Life-span exposure to low doses of aspartame beginning during prenatal life increases cancer effects in rats. Environ Health Perspect 2007;115:1293-97.
  • 8 Bandyopadhyay A, Ghoshal S, Mukherjee A. Genotoxicity Testing of low- calorie sweeteners: aspartame, acesulfame-k, and saccharin. Drug Chem Toxicol 2008;31(4):447-57.
  • 9 Mukherjee A, Chakrabarti J. In vivo cytogenetic studies on mice exposed to acesulfame-K—a non-nutritive sweetener. Food Chem Toxicol 1997;35(12):1177-9.
  • 10 Ghosh MN. Fundamentals of experimental pharmacology. 4th ed. Kolkata; Hilton and company: 2008. pp: 178.
  • 11 Nafisa PCF, Chakradha VL, Vandana SP, Suresh RN. An experimental evaluation of the antidiabetic and antilipidemic properties of standardized Memodica charantia fruit extract. BMC Complemen Alter Med 2007;7(29):1-8.
  • 12 McLean BI, Shephard NW, Merrit RJ, Hildick-Smith G. Repeated dose study of sucralose tolerance in human subjects. Food Chem Toxicol 2000;38(2):123-9.
  • 13 Kakadiya J, Shah M, Shah NJ. Effect of nobivolol on serum diabetic marker and lipid profile in normal and streptozotocin-nicotinamide induced diabetic rats. Biol Chem Sci 2010;1:329-334.
  • 14 Mortelmans K, Zeiger E. The ames salmonella/microsome mutagenicity assay. Mutat Res 2009;455(1-2):29-60.
  • 15 Maron DM, Ames BN. Revised methods for the salmonella mutagenicity test. Mutat Res 1983;113:173-215.