Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2018 Jul 30:1-11. doi: 10.1080/09637486.2018.1492522.
Han P, Bagenna B, Fu M.
Objective
- To review the current evidence regarding physiological responses relevant to sweet taste mechanisms and the impact on appetite control.
- Specifically, the review focuses on the type 1 member 2 (T1R2)/ type 1 member 3 (T1R3) subunits of taste receptors in the oral cavity and the gastrointestinal tract (GIT), which are activated by sugars, D-amino acids, sweet proteins and non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS).
- The relationship among sweet agonists, appetite and food intake was also summarized.
Background
- Sweet taste has been associated with food reward and carbohydrate energy sources. However, excessive sugar consumption is blamed for the prevalence of overweight and obesity.
- To expand the understanding of sweet agonists in appetite, satiety and food intake, it is important to understand the physiological and neural responses to sweet taste agonists-receptor bindings at various sites during food consumption, mainly the oral cavity and GIT. In addition, it is important to understand the similarity and differences between the effect of caloric sugar and NNSs.
- Currently, it is known that not all sweeteners bind to the same sites on the taste receptors. Common caloric sweeteners, including sucrose, fructose and sucralose, certain NNSs like saccharin and Acesulfame-K, and dipeptide sweeteners such as aspartame and neotame, preferentially bind to sites on T1R2. Cyclamate, however, binds to T1R3.
Methods
- Peer-reviewed publications written in English were searched in PubMed, Google Scholar and Web of Science. Those covering either caloric sugar or NNS on the following topics were screened and reviewed:
- Hormonal and/or brain responses to sweet taste agonists presented in oral cavity or GIT;
- Sweet taste perception, satiety and food intake.
- The main findings of included articles were synthesized and compared between caloric sugars and NNSs. The majority of reviewed studies included human participants, except for those investigating GIT administration of sweet agonists and hormonal responses and brain activation. This was due to the lack of data for human participants.
- The investigators reviewed hormonal response to oral and GIT perception of sweetness (cephalic phase responses), as well as brain responses to sweetness via oral or GIT administration. Lastly, the relationship between sweet perception, satiety and food intake in humans was discussed, highlighting the importance of individual sweetness perceptual variations.
Findings
- The studies reviewed showed mixed findings on the cephalic phase hormone response to sugar and NNSs in human subjects.
- To date there are no human neuroimaging studies that explore the direct effects of gut stimulation by sugar or NNSs on the brain. Animal studies indicated that brain response induced by sweet sensing in the GIT is similar to that in the oral cavity.
- Study findings consistently showed no impact of NNS on gastric emptying, appetite sensations, or hormone secretions in humans.
- The results of investigations of the association between sweet sensitivity and food intake were mixed. Discrepancies between studies were likely due to differences in study participants and sweet taste sensitivity and dietary intake assessment methods.
Conclusions
- Compared to NNSs, caloric sugars have a stronger potency in regulating hormone secretion and brain activation of the reward circuitry relevant for appetite control.
- The evidence summarized in this report suggest that NNSs may serve as a good substitute for sugar to provide sweet taste with little energy.
- The long term effect of caloric sugars and NNS on the regulation of appetite and food intake in humans remains unclear and will require further investigation.
- Future studies need to better control the condition of both subjects and stimulus and account for individual differences regarding CPIR. Mixed or missing information regarding the stimuli, including the concentration and duration of the sweet stimulus, make direct comparisons between studies difficult.
Points to Consider
- The failure of NNS to elicit the release of peptides associated with gastric emptying, appetite sensations and hormone secretions could theoretically result in lower satiety and augmented energy intake.
- While sweet taste seems to not have an impact on satiety, inter-individual variations of sweet perceptions were related to food choice and consumption.


Robyn Flipse, MS, MA, RDN is a registered dietitian, cultural anthropologist and scientific advisor to the Calorie Control Council, whose 30+ year career includes maintaining a busy nutrition counseling practice, teaching food and nutrition courses at the university level, and authoring 2 popular diet books and numerous articles and blogs on health and fitness. Her ability to make sense out of confusing and sometimes controversial nutrition news has made her a frequent guest on major media outlets, including CNBC, FOX News and USA Today. Her passion is communicating practical nutrition information that empowers people to make the best food decisions they can in their everyday diets. Reach her on Twitter

“I’m troubled by the AAP statement calling for even more research on LNCS, which have already gone through years of rigorous testing and research and been established as safe by health authorities the world over. LNCS are a tool for managing both calorie intake and helping to reduce sugar intake. They are not a cure for obesity, and were never intended to solve obesity, but can be used by anyone of any age to help manage dietary intakes of added sugar. Moreover, judicious use of LNCS can help people feel less deprived as they reduce added sugar and thus help them reach dietary goals and improve compliance with a more balanced diet, ” said Keith-Thomas Ayoob, EdD, RD, FAND, Associate Clinical Professor Emeritus, Department of Pediatrics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine
“Low calorie sweeteners remain an important tool in reducing sugar consumption in children. While available data reinforces the safety of these products in children, future research should be embraced to further enhance our understanding. I am an advocate for product labeling of nonnutritive sweetener content, as transparency in what children are ingesting is important for parents. Current estimates show that intake is well below the ADI,” said Dr. Keri Peterson, Internal Medicine, medical advisor to the Calorie Control Council.







