From biology to behavior: a cross‐disciplinary seminar series surrounding added sugar and low‐calorie sweetener consumption

Abstract

Summary Introduction This report presents a synopsis of a three‐part, cross‐sector, seminar series held at the George Washington University (GWU) in Washington, DC from February–April, 2018. The overarching goal of the seminar series was to provide a neutral forum for diverse stakeholders to discuss and critically evaluate approaches to address added sugar intake, with a key focus on the role of low‐calorie sweeteners (LCS). Methods During three seminars, twelve speakers from academic institutions, federal agencies, non‐profit organizations, and the food and beverage industries participated in six interactive panel discussions to address: 1) Do Farm Bill Policies Impact Population Sugar Intake? 2) What is the Impact of Sugar‐sweetened Beverage (SSB) Taxes on Health and Business? 3) Is Sugar Addictive? 4) Product Reformulation Efforts: Progress, Challenges, and Concerns? 5) Low‐calorie Sweeteners: Helpful or Harmful, and 6) Are Novel Sweeteners a Plausible Solution? Discussion of each topic involved brief 15‐minute presentations from the speakers, which were followed by a 25‐minute panel discussion moderated by GWU faculty members and addressed questions generated by the audience. Sessions were designed to represent opposing views and stimulate meaningful debate. Given the provocative nature of the seminar series, attendee questions were gathered anonymously using Pigeonhole™, an interactive, online, question and answer platform. Results This report summarizes each presentation and recapitulates key perspectives offered by the speakers and moderators. Conclusions The seminar series set the foundation for robust cross‐sector dialogue necessary to inform meaningful future research, and ultimately, effective policies for lowering added sugar intakes.

Does the Australian Health Star Rating System Encourage Added Sugar Reformulation? Trends in Sweetener Use in Australia

“…Relationships from observational studies are correlational and may be biased, as participants with existing morbidities may be more likely to consume NNS than those without [ 9 ]. Concerns have also been raised regarding the potential substitution effects of UPF containing NNS for nutritious whole foods, and the long-term impact this may have on dietary balance and population health [ 35 ]. Reformulation of UPF with NNS may create a ‘health halo effect’, allowing industry to make these products appear ‘healthy’, potentially resulting in higher consumption of these foods [ 36 ], while also displacing nutritious foods from the diet.…”

The drivers, trends and dietary impacts of non-nutritive sweeteners in the food supply: a narrative review

“…Given the novelty of many NNS, questions have been posed about their risk to public health (37) . Systematic reviews have found that the benefits and harms of NNS are inconsistently reported (38,39) .…”

“…In public health, the nature and scope of risk are broader than the toxicological outcomes outlined above. Concerns have also been raised over the potential substitution effects of low-energy, NNS-containing discretionary foods for nutritious whole foods, and the long-term impact this may have on population health (37) . Nutrient-level policies to reduce added sugar consumption may encourage the reformulation of existing high-sugar products with NNS.…”

Global trends in added sugars and non-nutritive sweetener use in the packaged food supply: drivers and implications for public health

“…Second, there is a possible indirect, adverse, unintended consequence resulting from shifts in population taste preferences to sweeter palates. Third, a health halo may be ascribed to UPF containing NNS, which may then be substituted for nutritious whole foods (38) .…”