Dataset Information

The use of low-calorie sweeteners is associated with self-reported prior intent to lose weight in a representative sample of US adults.

ABSTRACT: Low-calorie sweeteners (LCSs) are said to be a risk factor for obesity and diabetes. Reverse causality may be an alternative explanation.Data on LCS use, from a single 24-h dietary recall, for a representative sample of 22 231 adults were obtained from 5 cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999-2008 NHANES). Retrospective data on intent to lose or maintain weight during the prior 12-months and 10-year weight history were obtained from the weight history questionnaire. Objectively measured heights and weights were obtained from the examination. Primary analyses evaluated the association between intent to lose/maintain weight and use of LCSs and specific LCS product types using survey-weighted generalized linear models. We further evaluated whether body mass index (BMI) may mediate the association between weight loss intent and use of LCSs. The association between 10-year weight history and current LCS use was evaluated using restricted cubic splines.In cross-sectional analyses, LCS use was associated with a higher prevalence of obesity and diabetes. Adults who tried to lose weight during the previous 12 months were more likely to consume LCS beverages (prevalence ratio=1.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.54-1.75), tabletop LCS (prevalence ratio=1.68, 95% CI 1.47-1.91) and LCS foods (prevalence ratio=1.93, 95% CI 1.60-2.33) as compared with those who did not. In mediation analyses, BMI only partially mediated the association between weight control history and the use of LCS beverages, tabletop LCS, but not LCS foods. Current LCS use was further associated with a history of prior weight change (for example, weight loss and gain).LCS use was associated with self-reported intent to lose weight during the previous 12 months. This association was only partially mediated by differences in BMI. Any inference of causality between attempts at weight control and LCS use is tempered by the cross-sectional nature of these data and retrospective self-reports of prior weight loss/maintenance intent.

SUBMITTER: Drewnowski A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4817079 | biostudies-other | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConsumption of low-calorie sweeteners (LCSs) has increased markedly during the past several decades, yet the prevalence of LCS consumption in recent years is currently unknown.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to describe LCS consumption in the United States and to characterize consumption by sociodemographic subgroups, source, frequency, eating occasion, and location.DesignCross-sectional study using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey data from 2009 to 2012. The prevalence of LCS consumption was assessed using two 24-hour dietary recalls, while the frequency (number of times per day), occasion (meal vs snack vs alone), and location of LCS consumption (at home vs away from home) was assessed using data from the one, in-person, 24-hour dietary recall.ParticipantsNational Health and Nutrition Examination Survey participants (2 years old or older) either in 2009-2010 (n=9,047) or in 2011-2012 (n=7,939). After excluding participants with implausible energy intake (n=44), the final sample size was 16,942.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was the proportion of individuals consuming one or more foods, beverages, or packets containing LCSs during at least one of their two dietary recalls.Statistical analyses performedData were weighted to provide national estimates and Stata frequency procedures for complex survey design were used for all analyses.ResultsOur findings were that 25.1% of children and 41.4% adults reported consuming LCSs. Most LCS consumers reported use once daily (80% of children, 56% of adults) and frequency of consumption increased with body weight in adults. LCS consumption was higher in females compared with males among adults, and in obese individuals, compared with overweight and normal-weight individuals. Individuals of non-Hispanic white race/ethnicity also had higher prevalence of consumption compared with non-Hispanic blacks and Hispanics and those in the highest tertile of income had higher LCS consumption compared with individuals of middle or low income across LCS product categories in adults, and for LCS beverages and LCS foods in children. Most LCS consumers reported consuming LCS with meals (64% of adults, 62% of children) and the majority of LCS consumption occurred at home (71% and 72% among adults and children, respectively).ConclusionsLCS consumption is highly prevalent in the United States, among both children and adults. Well-controlled, prospective trials are required to understand the health impact of this widespread LCS exposure.

Project description:BackgroundNutritional labels aim to support people to make informed healthy food choices, but many people do not understand the meaning of calories on food labels. Another approach is to provide calorie information with an interpretation of what the calorie content of food means for energy expenditure, known as physical activity calorie equivalent (PACE) labelling. PACE aims to illustrate how many minutes of physical activity are equivalent to the calories contained in food/drinks. This study investigated the views of the public about the possible implementation of PACE labelling.MethodsData was obtained from a nationally representative sample of adults in the United Kingdom and collected by UK Ipsos KnowledgePanel. Panellists are recruited via a random probability unclustered address-based sampling method. 4,000 panellists were randomly invited to participate and asked to compare their views about traffic light and PACE labelling preferences and behaviour parameters.ResultsData were analysed descriptively and using logistic and multinomial regression analyses. 2,668/4,000 (67%) of those invited participated. More participants preferred traffic light (43%vs33%) than PACE labelling, but more reported PACE was easier to understand (41%vs27%) and more likely to catch their attention (49%vs31%). More participants thought PACE was more likely to help them avoid high calorie food than traffic light labelling (44%vs28%). Physically active (3-4 or 5+ days/week) respondents were more likely to report PACE would catch their attention than traffic light labelling, compared with less active participants (weighted adjusted relative risk ratio = 1.42 (1.00-2.00) and 1.45 (1.03-2.05 respectively)). Perceived overweight was the most predictive factor (weighted adjusted OR = 2.24 (1.19 to 4.20)) in whether PACE was considered useful in helping people decide what to eat/buy.ConclusionThe public identified value to their health in labelling food with PACE information. PACE labelling may be a useful approach to complement current approaches to food labelling.

Project description:BackgroundReplacement of caloric sweeteners with lower- or no-calorie alternatives may facilitate weight loss or weight maintenance by helping to reduce energy intake; however, past research examining low-calorie sweeteners (LCSs) and body weight has produced mixed results.ObjectiveThe objective was to systematically review and quantitatively evaluate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies, separately, that examined the relation between LCSs and body weight and composition.DesignA systematic literature search identified 15 RCTs and 9 prospective cohort studies that examined LCSs from foods or beverages or LCSs consumed as tabletop sweeteners. Meta-analyses generated weighted mean differences in body weight and composition values between the LCS and control groups among RCTs and weighted mean correlations for LCS intake and these parameters among prospective cohort studies.ResultsIn RCTs, LCSs modestly but significantly reduced all outcomes examined, including body weight (-0.80 kg; 95% CI: -1.17, -0.43), body mass index [BMI (in kg/m²): -0.24; 95% CI: -0.41, -0.07], fat mass (-1.10 kg; 95% CI: -1.77, -0.44), and waist circumference (-0.83 cm; 95% CI: -1.29, -0.37). Among prospective cohort studies, LCS intake was not associated with body weight or fat mass, but was significantly associated with slightly higher BMI (0.03; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.06).ConclusionsThe current meta-analysis provides a rigorous evaluation of the scientific evidence on LCSs and body weight and composition. Findings from observational studies showed no association between LCS intake and body weight or fat mass and a small positive association with BMI; however, data from RCTs, which provide the highest quality of evidence for examining the potentially causal effects of LCS intake, indicate that substituting LCS options for their regular-calorie versions results in a modest weight loss and may be a useful dietary tool to improve compliance with weight loss or weight maintenance plans.

Dataset Information

The use of low-calorie sweeteners is associated with self-reported prior intent to lose weight in a representative sample of US adults.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets