TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

“Genotoxic” Warning: Chemical Found in Common Sweetener Damages DNA

33 pointsby lunarualmost 2 years ago

7 comments

refurbalmost 2 years ago
<i>The TK6 cells were exposed to 20 concentrations of sucralose-6-acetate (maximum 4.5489 mM or 2000 μg&#x2F;ml) or 20 concentrations of sucralose (maximum 10 mM or 3980 μg&#x2F;ml)</i><p>If you look at the genotoxic Multiflow results (tables 3-4), the genotoxic signals only showed up at the highest concentrations (&gt;300 ug&#x2F;mL).<p>Peak concentrations of sucralose in blood after consumption is ~300 ng&#x2F;mL, so about 1000x fold less.<p>Also note the paper showed <i>non-mutagenicity</i> in the bacterial reserve mutation test (Ames Test).<p>So the results are interesting, but I&#x27;m not sure how applicable they are to actual exposure in humans.
评论 #36237500 未加载
hedoraalmost 2 years ago
Every time one if these stories pops up, I feel compelled to point out that artificial sweeteners have been tied to weight gain, so unless you are diabetic, there’s no reason to ingest them.<p>In general, they cause your metabolism to slow down, and make you feel hungrier. Giving them to mice on calorie restricted diets causes weight gain and lethargy in the mice.<p>Giving a subjectively identical amount of sugar to the mice (on top of the calorie restricted diet) causes less weight gain than the artificial sweeteners. (Because the mice stay active.)
评论 #36241641 未加载
评论 #36248316 未加载
jvanderbotalmost 2 years ago
I hate headlines that can&#x27;t just give you the obvious information: which sweetener?<p>Its suraclose, known as Splenda.
评论 #36240065 未加载
zug_zugalmost 2 years ago
Interesting that this refers to &quot;Enhanced intestinal permeability (leaky gut)&quot;, which wikipedia insists is very different than &quot;leaky gut syndrome&quot; which it describes as &quot;a hypothetical, medically unrecognized condition&quot;
netsharcalmost 2 years ago
Is this a legitimate site or one of those sites that e.g. showed NOAA ocean waves height data after the Fukushima tsunami and claims it shows radiation levels across the Pacific?<p>You know the type, generic domain name that sounds vaguely news-related, cheap-looking logo, suspicious by-lines...<p>Edit: well the content is legit, but since it&#x27;s stolen from [1], that proves this &quot;SciTechDaily&quot; is a content farm..<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bme.unc.edu&#x2F;2023&#x2F;06&#x2F;chemical-found-in-common-sweetener-damages-dna&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;bme.unc.edu&#x2F;2023&#x2F;06&#x2F;chemical-found-in-common-sweeten...</a> - an .edu URL is more trustworthy...
tedunangstalmost 2 years ago
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tandfonline.com&#x2F;doi&#x2F;full&#x2F;10.1080&#x2F;10937404.2023.2213903" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.tandfonline.com&#x2F;doi&#x2F;full&#x2F;10.1080&#x2F;10937404.2023.2...</a>
danarlowalmost 2 years ago
I still can’t believe that sucralose ever passed a safety trial. When has it ever been sensible to eat chlorocarbons? It’s amazing that it took this long to find some kind of genotoxic effect.