The impact of low and no-caloric sweeteners on glucose absorption, incretin secretion, and glucose tolerance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The consumption of non-nutritive, low, or no-calorie sweeteners (LCS) is increasing globally. Previously thought to be physiologically inert, there is a growing body of evidence that LCS not only provide a sweet taste but may also elicit metabolic effects in the gastrointestinal tract. This review provides a brief overview of the chemical and receptor-binding properties and effects on chemosensation of different LCS but focuses on the extent to which LCS stimulates glucose transport, incretin and insulin secretion, and effects on glucose tolerance. Aspartame and sucralose both bind to a similar region of the sweet receptor. For sucralose, the data are contradictory regarding effects on glucose tolerance in humans and may depend on the food or beverage matrix and the duration of administration, as suggested by longer term rodent studies. For aspartame, there are fewer data. On the other hand, acesulfame-potassium (Ace-K) and saccharin have similar binding characteristics to each other but, while Ace-K may increase incretin secretion and glucose responses in humans, there are no data on saccharin except in rats, which show impaired glucose tolerance after chronic administration. Additional research, particularly of the effects of chronic consumption, is needed to provide concrete evidence for beneficial or detrimental effects of LCS on blood glucose regulation in humans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".