4 ms·
> treat artificial sweeteners as a single group In defense of an otherwise-poor study, it didn't do this. Six of the most common artificial sweeteners were tes
by Bartweiss 8y ago
> treat artificial sweeteners as a single group
In defense of an otherwise-poor study, it didn't do this. Six of the most common artificial sweeteners were tested on the bacterial assay and their results reported and discussed separately. Another sequence of assays was run on a panel of sports supplements with varying sweeteners. It looks to me like the only reason for grouping these chemicals was practical - they have interchangeable dietary uses, so it's helpful to observe their varying responses on a single test.
It'd be a pretty interesting study, except that the assay's quality and sensitivity seem hugely in doubt.
- bunderbunder 8y agoDoubling down on that point a bit more - I think that, assuming the study is high quality, one that looks at all the popular artificial sweeteners together is probably more valuable from a "practical application" perspective, because it allows you to make more of an apples-to-apples comparison among the individual sweeteners. If all you've got is bunch of isolated studies that only look at one of them at a time, you'll always have some room for doubt about whether a difference in outcome reflects the sweetener being tested, or some difference in the experimental protocol.