saccharin

Not that the FDA is always right, but after the debacle with saccharin they wanted to be sure that aspartame was safe.

Again, the jury is still out, but certain sweeteners (aspartame, sucralose, and possibly saccharin) are looking suspect.

The thing is that saccharin is not widely used any more.

From the article Nostromo just posted[1], looks like the mouse models were based on aspartame, saccharin, and sucralose, and the human subjects were taking saccharin.

This write up also only implicates saccharin in the harmful alterations of the gut flora, not other sweeteners.

The followup study confirming the effects on humans, which was a much smaller study, only involved saccharin.

In agreement with the 16S rRNA analysis, saccharin treatment induced the largest changes in microbial relative species abundance (Fig.

In the Israeli experiment, 10-week-old mice were fed a daily dose of aspartame, sucralose or saccharin.

If saccharin is found to be harmful, that is nice to know, but not highly relevant.

This is one of the oldest and most frequent allegations, especially against saccharin and aspartame.

About 100% of my artificial sweetener consumption is saccharin mixed in coffee or iced tea.

Transferring the microbiota composition of HFD-consuming mice drinking water or pure saccharin replicated the glucose intolerance phenotype (P < 0.004, Fig.

You cannot confirm the effects of "artificial sweeteners" as a category with an experiment that is based on saccharin.

So, yeah, in the US, "pink" means saccharin.

From the caption on one of the figures (which is all I can access without buying the article) "NAS; saccharin, sucralose and aspartame".

> You cannot confirm the effects of "artificial sweeteners" as a category with an experiment that is based on saccharin.

Saccharin continues to be banned here as a food additive because of that (now long believed to be flawed) 1970's research which linked it to cancer.