I have no idea whether the research this article is based on is sound. What seems interesting is that the non-caloric sweeteners they tested are completely dif

I have no idea whether the research this article is based on is sound. What seems interesting is that the non-caloric sweeteners they tested are completely different chemicals, and yet they all were correlated with weight gain or diabetes. It's as if just being a sweetener is enough. That makes some sense to me. If a jolt of sweetness primes the metabolism for a glucose rush that never comes, perhaps the subject starts (unconsciously) hunting for another food that will provide the rush - starch might fit the bill, I guess. Or alcohol. Someone noted that the article title is clickbaity. Of course it is - this is The Guardian, which is now effectively a tabloid. It's not really a newspaper of record any more.