1The “Diet” Delusion
Products promoting “diet” are attracting consumers more than ever. Due to theincrease of people with metabolic syndrome and a growing national interest for health,zero-calorie sodas are now occupying more than one-fourths of the soda market in Japan(“new flavor released in stores,” par. 2). However, “zero calories” itself does not mean“overweight cure” or “fat remover”. Does consuming these calorie-free products really lead a
way away from obesity and disease? Although products with the slogan “zero calories” or“diet” may sound like a healthy choice to make, the effects of consuming them are not always
desirable.
Artificial sweeteners, the big cheese in making a product “calorie-free”, arechemically produced molecules that mimic the taste of sugar, but have no carbohydrates orcalories. Also referred to as nonnutritive sweeteners, the major difference between them andthe other sugar substitutes lies in the point that artificial sweeteners are not carbohydrates andtherefore, do not increase blood glucose levels (“Artificial Sweeteners. D,” par. 1). There are
five types qualified for use in the United States: Saccarin, Aspartame, Sucralose, Acesulfame
potassium (Acesulfame K), and Neotame. Since they are so intensely sweet, being 160 to
13,000 times sweeter than sugar, only small amounts are required to imitate the sweetness ofsugar (“Are Sweeteners Safe,” sec. 1). Thus, they’re esteemed everywhere, from sodas andchewing gum to baked foods and cooking condiments.

2Pros do exist in consuming these non-caloric sugar substitutes. For one, they provide
happy news for diabetics, enabling them to enjoy sweets without raising their blood glucose
levels as much (“Cutting Calories Carbs”, sec. 1). Also, they can help reduce a person’s
calorie intake while he’s on a weight management program and is limiting his calories. Inaddition, they don’t contribute to tooth decay like sugar (“Artificial: Understanding these,”
secs. 1-5). Their safety is indeed guaranteed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
through hundreds of studies in total. There should be no reason to refuse using them.
Nevertheless, there are cons for each artificial sweetener that cannot be simplyignored. Artificial sweeteners were produced in labs just throughout the last two centuries,
and only scientific theory and animal tests have proven their safe use. They do not exist innature, and have not been in contact with humans long enough to prove their actual safety onpeople. Whereas sugar has proven its safety by being a crucial energy source for all animals
ever since life was born, it’s not illogical to say that the benefits of these substitutes still
remain ambiguous (Sugimoto 5).
There are times when people just cannot resist their desire for sugar, and findthemselves reaching for sweets before knowing it. This is completely natural as a humanbeing. Instinctively, humans have distinguished what food was necessary and what was
harmful from the primary tastes, and “sweet” foods usually meant they contained calories.
“Sweetness” has been the clue for animals to reach carbohydrates, the essential nutrient for all

3animals to live (Sugimoto 3). However, when artificial sweeteners, non-carbohydrates, comeinto the body instead of glucose, the body is deceived. The body’s demand for carbohydrates
is ignored and is instead fed with forgeries that do not provide the body energy at all.
Of course, the consequences of this deception aren’t light. These synthetic molecules
trigger the same taste receptors as glucose, but they behave quite differently once they’re
inside the body (Horn 5).
Sugar has no law specifying its daily intake allowance, and the FDA has evendecided not to set a Daily Value on sugar (Hill, pars. 1, 3). If artificial sweeteners werecompletely safe for humans, there would be no stipulations limiting their use, either. However,each of these artificial sweeteners is regulated by the FDA as a food additive, and an
acceptable daily intake (ADI) is established for each one (“Artificial Sweeteners. M,” sec. 5).
The ADI is “the intake level in humans that may be safely consumed for a lifetime byvirtually any member of the population without health or safety concerns (Rulis and Levitt3).” To put it the other way around, that means that overuse of these additives may result in“health or safety concerns”. Unless artificial sweeteners are used properly, this food, thismanmade technology, is toxic and dangerous. Based on a survey, however, only five percent
answered that they were aware of the ADI for artificial sweeteners (“Artificial Labeling,” sec.
2). Not many people regard or even know about the ADI in reality and are continuouslyconsuming them without thinking about the health effects it may cause.

4
Most artificial sweeteners were made from chemical accidents, not from an effort toinvent sugar substitutes. For example, saccharin, the oldest approved sweetener, wasdiscovered in 1879 while researchers were working on coal tar derivatives (Yang 101).
Although it claims to be the “best researched sweetener”, how could a substance including tar
be safe? The FDA once intended to ban saccharin’s use due to fear for its carcinogenicity. The
final ban decision failed to pass, but instead, every product with saccharin had a warning label
until 2000: “Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains
saccharin which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals (“ArtificialSweeteners. M,” sec. 6).” Since studies concluded that the bladder tumor findings in male rats
did not translate to humans, this label is no longer existent. However, unlike sugar, saccharin
has only been used for a little more than a century. Like how the swine flu epidemic wascaused in 2009, the carcinogenic factor in saccharin may change its form suddenly and affecthumans as well.
Experts assert that there is sufficient data from studies, both short-term and long-term,in proving the safety of artificial sweeteners. On neotame’s website, it notes about thelong-term and lifetime animal studies that experts conducted as preclinical studies. Yet,“long-term” is probably less than a human lifetime, considering that neotame was onlyapproved ten years ago (“neotame,” 4). Most sweeteners pass through the body unchanged,
but there is still a possibility of synthetic substances accumulating inside the body over the5years. There are some things that people cannot predict when the product makes its debut; noone predicted tobacco’s toxicity, but it was a carcinogen. Artificial sweeteners could turn out
to be the twenty-first century drug.
Regardless of its possible toxicity, people keep choosing “zero-calorie” products andconsuming artificial sweeteners because they are often attracted by the “calorie-free = fastest
way to get slim” delusion. This equation, unfortunately, is false. One way this mistake can beexplained is by the brain phenomenon, compensation. “Sweetness” sparks the dopamine
signal, just like drugs such as cocaine. The brain’s pleasure centers are triggered, but at thesame time, the lack of calories in artificial sweeteners provides no real satisfaction. The
person then reaches for more food, thinking it’s absolutely fine to eat an additional amount(Mercola, sec. 5). They overcompensate the amount of calories they consume, and they end
up eating much more than they need to. This, of course, leads to weight gain.
Not only are there scientific theories proving the unfavorable effects of artificial
sweeteners, but actual studies have also made it clear that consuming these sweeteners leads
to health disorders.
The most devastating fact for people anticipating weight loss by consuming“zero-calorie” products, may be that consuming artificial sweeteners actually caused waist
size increases in people and weight gain in rats. The University of Texas reported that over aten-year span, diet soft drink users experienced 70 percent greater increases in waist

6circumferences while drinkers drinking two or more cans a day experienced 500 percent
greater increases, compared with the non-users (Sansom, sec.3). At Purdue University, rats fed
with saccharin-sweetened yogurt gained more weight over two weeks than the rats fed withglucose-sweetened yogurt (Jameson, par. 19). Researchers analyzed that this was due to therat becoming more efficient at absorbing sugar from its food, because of its necessity togenerate itself out of a limited amount of calories.
The actual reports of consequences of consuming artificial sweeteners are not limited
to these two. Other reported cases include inflammatory bowel disease, raised blood glucose
levels, stroke risk, brain tumors, and mental retardation (Corsi, par. 1) (Melnick, par. 1)(“Health Dangers,” sec. 3). These are all surely not the desired effects of consuming“zero-calorie” products.
What’s more, The American Diabetes Association and the American Heart
Association released a joint statement giving cautious approval of nonnutritive sweeteners(NNS) (Wulffson, par. 2). They had been recommending the use of these sweeteners, but they
have now changed their stance, stating that “NNS may be used in a structured diet to replacesources of added sugars and that this substitution may result in modest energy intake
reductions and weight loss (Gardner 517).” They did not mention any safety issues, but didpoint out the high possibility of energy intake compensation. Even these nationalorganizations have acknowledged the fact that artificial sweeteners aren’t direct cures for7disease and obesity.
Consuming “zero-calorie” products containing artificial sweeteners may soundhealthy, but actually, unhappy consequences await people due to deception on their own bodyand mind. Stipulations limiting their use and studies proving health disorders only indicatethat consuming artificial sweeteners is quite far from healthy, but possibly harmful indeed.
Instead, by contributing to overcompensation and weight gain, they may be leading a way toobesity and disease. Artificial sweeteners aren’t magic powder for weight loss. If someone isordering a hamburger with a large size diet coke thinking that he could get slim, he is notquite correct.

8Works Cited“Are Artificial Sweeteners Safe?” HEALTHBEAT. Harvard Health Publications, 30 March
2005. Web. 6 Sept. 2012. <http://www.health.harvard.edu/healthbeat/HEALTHbeat_033005.htm>“Artificial Sweetener Labeling Initiative.” Sugar sweet by nature. The Sugar Association, Inc.,
n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. <http://www.sugar.org/nutritional-advocacy/
artificial-sweetener-labeling-initiative.html>“Artificial Sweeteners.” Diabetes Education Online. The Regents of the University ofCalifornia, 2011. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <http://dtc.ucsf.edu/living-with-diabetes/
diet-and-nutrition/understanding-carbohydrates/demystifying-sugar/
artificial-sweeteners/>“Artificial Sweeteners.” MedicineNet.com. MedicineNet Inc., 1996-2012. Web. 6 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.medicinenet.com/artificial_sweeteners/article.htm>“Artificial sweeteners: Understanding these and other sugar substitutes.” Mayo Clinic.com.
Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, 1998-2012. Web. 6 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/artificial-sweeteners/MY00073>
Corsi, E. Hector. “Artificial sweeteners may cause Inflammatory Bowel Disease.” Digital
Journal Contribute. digitaljournal.com, 17 May 2012. Web. 6 Sept. 2012.
<http://digitaljournal.com/article/325050>

9“Cutting Calories and Carbohydrates.” American Diabetes Association. American Diabetes
Association, 1995-2012. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. <http://www.diabetes.org/food-and-fitness/
food/what-can-i-eat/artificial-sweeteners/cutting-calories-and-carbohydrates.html>
Gardner, Christopher, et al. “Nonnutritive Sweeteners: Current Use and Health Perspectives:A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and the American
Diabetes Association.” Circulation 9 July 2012: 508-519. Web. 6 Nov. 2012.
<http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/126/4/509.full.pdf+html>“The Health Dangers of Artificial Sweeteners.” Global Healing Center. Global Healing
Center, 1998-2012. Web. 6 Sept. 2012. <http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/nutrition/artificial-sweeteners>
Hill, Cindy. “FDA RECOMMENDED SUGAR INTAKE.” LIVESTRONG.COM. DemandMedia, Inc., 23 May 2011. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <http://www.livestrong.com/article/448978-fda-recommended-sugar-intake/>Horn, Erina Elise Van. “Artificial Sweeteners: Their Origins and Mechanisms.” LFSC 608
University of Maryland May 2009: 1-24. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. <http://www.clfs.umd.edu/
grad/mlfsc/Artificial%20Sweeteners.pdf>
Jameson, Marni. “Artificial sweeteners can spark not-so-sweet problems.” Orlando Sentinel.
Orlando Sentinel, 29 Aug. 2012. Web. 14 Sept. 2012.

10<http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-08-29/health/os-artificial-sweeteners-201208
29_1_artificial-sweeteners-blood-sugar-metabolic-syndrome>
Melnick, Meredith. “Diet Soda May Lead to Stroke Risk? Really?” TIME Healthland. Time
Inc., 11 Feb. 2011. Web. 6 Sept. 2012. <http://healthland.time.com/2011/02/11/
diet-soda-may-lead-to-stroke-risk-really/>
Mercola, Joseph. “U.S. Kids Drowning In Diet Drinks.” Peak fitness Presented by
Mercola.com. Dr. Joseph Mercola, 31 Aug. 2012. Web. 14 Sept. 2012.
<http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2012/08/31/kids-diet-drinks.aspx>“neotame A Scientific Overview.” neotame.com. Sweeteners Holdings, Inc., 2002. Web. 14
Sept. 2012. <http://www.neotame.com/pdf/neotame_science_brochure_US_New.pdf>“A new flavor has been released for the first time in two years! The variety limited and season
limited ‘Zero Sparkling Muscat of Alexandria’ will be in stores nationwide fromMonday, September 3rd!” Sapporo Beverage News Release 2012. SAPPORO
BEVERAGE CO. LTD., 20 Aug. 2012. Web. 6 Nov. 2012.
<http://www.sapporo-inryo.jp/news_release/0000020114/index.html>
Rulis, Alan M. and Joseph A. Levitt. “FDA’S food ingredient approval process Safetyassurance based on scientific assessment.” Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 2Sept. 2008: 1-12. Web. 6 Nov. 2012. <http://www.caloriecontrol.org/pdf/Rulis_08.pdf>

11Sansom, Will. “Waistlines in people, glucose levels in mice hint at sweeteners’ effects.” HSC
NEWS. UT Health Science Center Antonio, 27 June 2011. Web. 6 Sept. 2012.
<http://www.uthscsa.edu/hscnews/singleformat2.asp?newID=3861>
Sugimoto, Akira. The Picture Book about Sugar. Tokyo: Nousan Gyoson Bunka Kyokai, 2006.
Print.
Wulffson, Robin. “Artificial sweeteners may be a healthy choice.” EmaxHealth.
eMaxhealth.com, 2005-2012. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. <http://www.emaxhealth.com/11306/
artificial-sweeteners-may-be-healthy-choice>
Yang, Qing. “Gain weight by ‘going diet?’ Artificial sweeteners and the neurobiology of sugar
cravings.” YALE JOURNAL OF BIOLOGY AND MEDICINE 83 (2010): 101-108. Web.
6 Sept. 2012. <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2892765/pdf/
yjbm_83_2_101.pdf>