Digestery
Diet and food › Sweeteners and Weight › Studies

Randomized trial · measured lab tests or safety

Trial in 30 healthy men: sweetener drinks did not clearly change daily food intake

Tey and colleagues · International journal of obesity (2005) · 2017

Original title: Effects of aspartame-, monk fruit-, stevia- and sucrose-sweetened beverages on postprandial glucose, insulin and energy intake.

Under review. A person has not yet checked this summary against the paper. It is written from the PubMed abstract. Until a person checks it, search engines are asked not to list this page.

What the study found

No difference

Lunch intake was higher after sweetener drinks than sucrose (P=0.010), but total daily energy intake did not differ (P=0.831). Total 3-hour blood sugar (P=0.960) and insulin (P=0.216) did not differ.

The study at a glance

Type of study
Randomized trial
Who or what was studied
30 people · 30 healthy men
What was tested
One mid-morning drink sweetened with aspartame, monk fruit, stevia or 65 g sucrose, each on a different day
What it measured
Lab tests or markers
Who has a stake
No disclosure in PubMed
No disclosure in PubMed.
Journal
International journal of obesity (2005), 2017
Source
PubMed record 27956737. This page is based on the abstract only.

How much this study counts

  • ✓Randomized: people were put into groups by chance, so the groups start out alike.
  • –Small: 30 people. Small trials can miss real effects or find chance ones.
  • –Measured lab tests or markers, which stand in for body weight and metabolic health. A better marker does not always mean better health.
  • •The PubMed record has no conflict-of-interest statement.
  • •Summarized from the PubMed abstract only. The full paper may hold details the abstract leaves out.

✓ Strength– Limit• Note

These points come from fixed rules about the type of study, its size and length, what it measured, and who has a stake. Every study on Digestery gets the same rules.

Where this study sits

Each dot is one on-topic paper on this question. Steps near the top answer the question more directly.

↑ Stronger evidence

  1. Trials in people: body weight

    4

    1 benefit, 1 mixed, 2 no difference

  2. Trials in people: other measures

    0

    None among the papers we read.

  3. Trials in people: lab tests or safety

    7

    1 benefit, 1 mixed, 4 no difference, 1 harm

    ↑ This study is the ringed dot

  4. Population studies

    5

    1 benefit, 4 harm

  5. Blood levels and genes

    1

    1 harm

↓ Weaker evidence

  • Points to benefit
  • Mixed
  • No difference
  • No direction
  • Points to harm

How it fits with the other research

The short answer to “Do artificial sweeteners cause weight gain?”

Trials say no; population studies disagree.

Confidence: low. Based on 32 on-topic papers.

Read the full answer

Of the other 6 papers on the same step: 1 benefit, 1 mixed, 3 no difference, 1 harm. This one found no difference.

Other papers on the same step

See all 32 studies on this question

How this page was made

Label

First read of the abstract
Claude Sonnet
Independent second read
Claude Haiku
Differences settled
The two reads differed. The reviewer checked the abstract and kept the first read. Claude Opus 5.5.
Headline
Claude Sonnet, from the checked study record. A script checked its numbers and wording.
Numbers
Checked against the abstract by a script
“How much this study counts”
Fixed rules, the same for every study
Source check by a person
Not yet. Required before search engines may list this page.

Spot an error? Email a flag with a link to your source, or use the form on the question page.