Zero-Calorie Sweeteners: How They Might Be Rewiring Your Brain

The quest for guilt-free sweetness has led to the widespread use of zero-calorie sweeteners in a variety of food and beverage products, often perceived as healthier alternatives to traditional sugar. From diet sodas to sugar-free yogurts, these substitutes promise the pleasure of sweetness without the associated calories. However, emerging scientific interest is beginning to explore whether their effects extend beyond mere calorie reduction, particularly in how they interact with the intricate workings of the human brain. The landscape of research in this area is complex and continuously evolving, suggesting a need for a nuanced understanding of these widely consumed substances.

Our brains are finely tuned to respond to sweet tastes, a fundamental preference that has likely evolved due to the association of sweetness with energy-rich foods crucial for survival. When we consume something sweet, taste receptors on our tongue send signals to the brain, triggering a cascade of responses. Notably, the reward pathways in the brain are activated, leading to the release of neurotransmitters like dopamine, which create feelings of pleasure and reinforcement. This system typically links the sensation of sweetness with the intake of calories, providing the body with the energy it needs. Zero-calorie sweeteners, while also activating these sweet taste receptors, present a different scenario as they provide little to no energy 1. This decoupling of sweetness from caloric content is a key area of investigation, as it potentially creates a discrepancy between the brain’s expectation of energy and the actual physiological outcome. This mismatch could have implications for how the brain processes sweetness and subsequently regulates food intake and metabolism.

The category of zero-calorie sweeteners encompasses a variety of compounds, each with its own unique chemical structure and metabolic fate, which may lead to different effects on the brain.

Aspartame, a widely used artificial sweetener, has been the subject of considerable research regarding its potential impact on the nervous system. Studies suggest a link between aspartame consumption and various neurophysiological symptoms 2. Unlike dietary protein, the consumption of aspartame can elevate the levels of phenylalanine and aspartic acid in the brain. These compounds are known to potentially inhibit the synthesis and release of crucial neurotransmitters such as dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin, which play significant roles in regulating neurophysiological activity. This interference with neurotransmitter balance has been associated with symptoms like learning problems, headaches, irritable moods, anxiety, depression, and insomnia 2. Furthermore, aspartame appears to act as a chemical stressor in the body, leading to elevated plasma cortisol levels and an increased production of free radicals. High cortisol levels and an excess of free radicals can heighten the brain’s vulnerability to oxidative stress, potentially leading to adverse effects on neurobehavioral health 2. The safety of aspartame has been a topic of ongoing debate, with a recent classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” based on limited evidence 3. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) has reaffirmed the acceptable daily intake of aspartame, stating that at commonly used doses, safety is not a major concern 5. Nevertheless, the potential for aspartame to directly influence neurotransmitter levels and increase oxidative stress suggests a mechanism of brain interaction that goes beyond simply activating sweet taste receptors.

Sucralose, another prevalent artificial sweetener, has also been investigated for its effects on brain function. Research indicates that sucralose can influence brain activity during food decision-making processes 6. Studies have explored the acute impacts of sucralose on brain responses when individuals are making choices about food. Furthermore, research has compared the effects of sucralose to those of sucrose (table sugar) on appetite and reward processing, with some findings suggesting differences that may be related to factors like obesity and sex 7. These studies imply that sucralose is not merely perceived as a sweet taste without consequence; it appears to engage brain regions involved in reward and decision-making, potentially altering how individuals respond to food cues even in the absence of caloric intake.

Stevia, a natural zero-calorie sweetener derived from the Stevia rebaudiana plant, is also being studied for its effects on the brain. Research is mapping how the brain responds to stevia compared to both caloric sweeteners and water 8. These studies aim to differentiate the specific neural effects of stevia from the general sensation of sweetness or the effect of hydration. By comparing brain responses across these conditions, researchers hope to gain a more nuanced understanding of how stevia interacts with the brain’s homeostatic (related to bodily needs like hunger and satiety) and hedonic (related to pleasure and reward) systems.

Xylitol and erythritol, sugar alcohols classified as low-calorie sweeteners, have shown distinct impacts on brain networks involved in appetite regulation 10. A study examining these sweeteners found that xylitol increased cerebral blood flow in the hypothalamus, a key brain region responsible for controlling appetite, whereas erythritol did not have this effect. Interestingly, glucose, a caloric sugar, had the opposite effect on blood flow in this area 10. Further analysis revealed complex patterns of similarities and differences in overall brain network properties following the consumption of xylitol, erythritol, and glucose. Both xylitol and erythritol were found to stimulate the release of gut hormones such as cholecystokinin (CCK) and peptide tyrosine tyrosine (PYY), which are known to play a role in promoting feelings of satiety 10. These findings suggest that even within the category of low-calorie sweeteners, different compounds can have specific and potentially distinct effects on brain regions that regulate appetite, possibly through mechanisms involving the gut-brain axis.

The brain’s reward system plays a crucial role in our relationship with food, associating the sweet taste of sugar with the energy it provides. This learned association influences our preferences and eating behaviors. Research has explored whether replacing sugar with non-caloric sweeteners disrupts this established connection and affects our long-term acceptance of sweet foods 5. One study investigated the effect of repeated consumption of non-caloric sweetened beverages compared to sugar-sweetened versions on their reward value 11. The study found that repeated exposure to the non-caloric sweetened drinks did not significantly alter their reward value as measured by behavioral tasks and fMRI brain imaging. However, participants generally preferred the sugar-sweetened drinks and nutrient-rich yogurt drinks over non-caloric sweetened soft drinks. While the fMRI analysis showed some differences in brain responses to non-caloric and sugar-sweetened soft drinks in specific brain areas, no such differences were observed for yogurt drinks 11. This suggests that the presence of other nutrients might influence how the brain processes sweetness in the absence of calories. Overall, while zero-calorie sweeteners activate sweet taste receptors, the lack of associated calories may lead to a dissociation in the brain’s reward pathways over time, potentially impacting taste preferences and the ability to regulate energy intake. The type of food or beverage in which the sweetener is consumed also appears to be a relevant factor.

Beyond immediate effects on brain activity and reward, concerns are emerging about the potential long-term impacts of zero-calorie sweetener consumption on cognitive function, appetite regulation, and overall brain health. Observational studies have begun to explore these associations. For instance, research has linked the daily consumption of artificially sweetened drinks to a potentially higher risk of dementia and stroke 13. This study, which followed participants over several years, found that individuals who reported drinking at least one artificially sweetened beverage per day were nearly three times as likely to experience an ischemic stroke or be diagnosed with dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease compared to those who drank such beverages less than once a week. It is crucial to note that this study demonstrates an association, not a direct cause-and-effect relationship, and experts emphasize the need for further research to understand the underlying biological mechanisms 13. Another study found a link between the consumption of both sugar-sweetened and artificially sweetened drinks with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation, an irregular heart rhythm 14. Specifically, those who drank more than two liters of artificially sweetened beverages per week had a 20% higher risk. These long-term observational findings raise important questions about the potential broader health implications of regular consumption of these sweeteners. Furthermore, the NutriNet-Santé study indicated a possible increased risk of cancer, particularly breast and obesity-related cancers, associated with the consumption of certain artificial sweeteners like aspartame and acesulfame-K 3. While the short-term use of zero-calorie sweeteners might seem beneficial for managing calorie intake, these emerging long-term observational studies suggest potential associations with serious health outcomes that warrant further investigation into the underlying mechanisms.

Given the increasing body of research, health organizations are beginning to formulate guidelines and express opinions on the use of non-sugar sweeteners. The World Health Organization (WHO) has issued a guideline suggesting that non-sugar sweeteners should not be used as a means of achieving weight control or reducing the risk of noncommunicable diseases 1. This recommendation is based on an assessment of the available evidence, which showed no long-term benefit on body fatness and potential undesirable long-term effects such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mortality in adults. The WHO notes that the evidence supporting the primary role of these sweeteners in replacing free sugars for long-term health benefits is not strong 1. Regarding aspartame, while the IARC classified it as possibly carcinogenic, the WHO reaffirmed the acceptable daily intake, highlighting the need for more research to refine our understanding of its potential carcinogenic hazard 4. The American Heart Association (AHA) has also adopted a cautious stance, emphasizing the need for more research into the long-term effects of artificial sweeteners and suggesting that water is often the best choice for hydration 13. While acknowledging that diet sodas might be a tool for some individuals to transition away from sugary drinks, the AHA advises against over-reliance on them as a healthy alternative 13. The prevailing expert opinion appears to be one of caution, underscoring the necessity for more robust research to fully elucidate the long-term health implications of widespread zero-calorie sweetener consumption.

In conclusion, the current understanding suggests that zero-calorie sweeteners are not metabolically inert substances with no impact beyond their sweet taste. Research indicates that they can interact with the brain in various ways, affecting neural pathways related to taste perception, reward, appetite regulation, and potentially even cognitive function. While different types of sweeteners may exert their effects through distinct mechanisms, the overarching theme is that these substances can influence brain activity despite their lack of caloric content. The need for further research is paramount, particularly in understanding the long-term consequences of their consumption and the specific mechanisms of action for each type of sweetener. Given the evolving evidence and the cautious recommendations from health organizations, individuals may benefit from adopting a balanced perspective on their intake of zero-calorie sweeteners and prioritizing whole, unsweetened foods and beverages whenever feasible.

Table 1: Summary of Potential Brain Effects of Different Zero-Calorie Sweeteners

Works cited

1. Use of non-sugar sweeteners – IRIS – World Health Organization …, accessed March 30, 2025, https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/375565/9789240083479-eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
2. Neurophysiological symptoms and aspartame: What is the … – PubMed, accessed March 30, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28198207/
3. Artificial sweeteners and cancer risk: Results from the NutriNet …, accessed March 30, 2025, https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003950
4. Aspartame hazard and risk assessment results released, accessed March 30, 2025, https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released
5. ‪Susie Swithers‬ – ‪Google Scholar‬, accessed March 30, 2025, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=d5RaknsAAAAJ&hl=en
6. ‪Xiaobei Zhang‬ – ‪Google Scholar‬, accessed March 30, 2025, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Dltc_HAAAAAJ&hl=en
7. ‪Brendan Angelo‬ – ‪Google Scholar‬, accessed March 30, 2025, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=PdeG_vEAAAAJ&hl=en
8. ‪Dr Nikoleta Stamataki‬ – ‪Google Scholar‬, accessed March 30, 2025, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=1lyRvMgAAAAJ&hl=en
9. ‪Syed Naved Quadri‬ – ‪Google Scholar‬, accessed March 30, 2025, https://scholar.google.co.in/citations?user=DlmgrO8AAAAJ&hl=en
10. Erythritol and xylitol differentially impact brain networks involved in …, accessed March 30, 2025, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34404339/
11. Effect of Replacing Sugar with Non-Caloric Sweeteners in … – PLOS, accessed March 30, 2025, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0081924
12. ‪Alastair Tulloch‬ – ‪Google Scholar‬, accessed March 30, 2025, https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=NziHvxgAAAAJ&hl=en
13. A diet soda a day might affect dementia risk, study suggests …, accessed March 30, 2025, https://www.heart.org/en/news/2021/05/20/a-diet-soda-a-day-might-affect-dementia-risk-study-suggests
14. Sweetened drinks linked to atrial fibrillation risk | American Heart …, accessed March 30, 2025, https://newsroom.heart.org/news/sweetened-drinks-linked-to-atrial-fibrillation-risk