The American population has become more and more aware about the food they eat and what they drink over the past few decades. There has been many different diets that have tried to combat weight gain including low fat diets, keto, and more. As of recent, sugar is now enemy number 1 when it comes to its negative effects on the body in excess. Many different food and drink (especially American) have added sugar which can quickly add up. For example, Pepsi has 39 grams of sugar per 12 ounces which is equal to 18 packets of sugar. Excess sugar at this amount can lead to high blood pressure, chronic inflammation, weight gain, diabetes, and more. Because of more public awareness over this issue, many companies starting looking for non-sugar based alternatives to their products.
Aspartame was invented in 1965 by James Schlatter while researching anticular drugs. He accidently found its "sweetness" component by licking the compound on his hand. By 1981, it was fully approved by the FDA to become a food additive. Its main purpose was to become a replacement for sugar in diet products, especially for soft drinks. Aspartame is 200 times sweeter then normal sugar and since its only used in small amounts, virtually provides no caloric intake for the consumer. The chemical structure of aspartame consists of 14 Carbon, 18 Hydrogen, 2 Nitrogen, and 5 Oxygen. Aspartame is a Dipeptide, Carboxylic Acid, and Methyl Ester. What causes the sweet taste in Aspartame is the modification of Phenylalanine by adding a methyl group to it, which tricks the body by thinking it is a beneficial protein.
Ever since Aspartames introduction, the diet soda market has exploded. In 2018, the global market for diet soft drinks reached 4.1 Billion dollars worldwide. With such an explosion comes a large increase of consumption. From this increase in consumption, this food industry miracle slowly started to show its dark side. The FDA says to limit Aspartame consumption to under 50 milligrams per kilogram per day, in which many Americans exceed. Aspartame has shown to have many adverse neurological effects on the body including behavioral and cognitive issues, learning problems, headaches, increased likelihood of mental disorders, and more. A 2016 study found that Oral intake of Aspartame altered behavior of mice, which may show issues for consumption by humans. Many of these issues are seen to be caused by Aspartames metabolites, in which some individuals are more sensitive to then others. One adverse effect that almost all people are susceptible to is the weight gain and increased apatite caused by Aspartame. This puts into question whether these "diet" products are really helping weight loss at all. Many companies such as Coca-Cola and NutraSweet have hired physicians and scientist to defend their product for monetary gain.
To conclude, the American diet is stereotypically very unhealthy and for good reason. The amount of fat, sodium, and sugar intake of the average American is much higher then it should be. And even though Aspartame gets a lot of heat from the media and healthcare industry, it just further shows that ones diet cannot be saved by just one miracle compound. It takes effort and patience to fix ones diet. If you want to avoid these adverse effects, drink water, not soda.
Citations:
How much sugar is really in pop/soda? KU Info. (2019, December 12). Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://kuinfo.ku.edu/how-much-sugar-really-popsoda#:~:text=Just%20one%2012%20ounce%20can,sugar%20from%20soft%20drinks%20alone.
The sweet danger of sugar. Harvard Health. (2022, January 6). Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart-health/the-sweet-danger-of-sugar#:~:text=%22The%20effects%20of%20added%20sugar,%2C%22%20says%20Dr.%20Hu.
Czarnecka, K., Pilarz, A., Rogut, A., Maj, P., Szymańska, J., Olejnik, Ł., & Szymański, P. (2021, June 7). Aspartame-true or false? narrative review of safety analysis of general use in products. Nutrients. Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8227014/#:~:text=Aspartame%20was%20invented%20in%201965,of%20research%20into%20antiulcer%20drugs.
U.S. National Library of Medicine. (n.d.). Aspartame. National Center for Biotechnology Information. PubChem Compound Database. Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Aspartame#section=Entrez-Crosslinks
Diet Soft Drinks Market Size & Share Report, 2019-2025. (n.d.). Retrieved April 25, 2023, from https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/diet-soft-drinks-market
Malkan, S. (2023, April 5). Aspartame: Decades of science point to serious health risks. U.S. Right to Know. Retrieved April 26, 2023, from https://usrtk.org/sweeteners/aspartame_health_risks/#:~:text=Aspartame%20has%20been%20linked%20to,2017%20study%20in%20Nutritional%20Neuroscience.
The title is very good. Phrasing the title as a question in this case will draw in readers. The picture of the coke bottle also draws in readers. It relates the question to a ubiquitous product that will be of interest many. Your lede paragraph is a bit long but it introduces the source of a strong interest in sugar alternatives. It is not quite clear which of your listed sources is the popular media article that initially attracted your interest. The "US Right to Know" site is not familiar to me, but it does seem to be a general interest site aimed at the general public. Your background paragraph on the invention of aspartame as a sweetener and the nature of the substance is interesting and strengthens the connection to chemistry. Your account of the recommendation of the FDA and the assertions of a variety of studies reflects the report in USRTK, but I don't know that it captures the extent of the controversy over research on Aspartame. Research on the effects of aspartame is complicated by the fact that its metabolites (aspartic acid, phenylalanine and methanol) are present in significant amounts in a normal diet. Nonetheless your conclusion is certainly warranted. It is unwise to rely on simplistic measures to fix complicated dietary problems. Overall I think the USRTK piece reflects negatively on chemistry. There seems to be the implication that anything "artificial" is harmful. Sugar, after all, is "natural" and taken in excess is clearly harmful. Overall a timely and interesting post.
ReplyDelete