In a world where food products are constantly being reformulated to meet consumer demands, artificial sweeteners, gums, and thickeners have become more and more common. These ingredients can improve taste and texture while catering to preferences like lower calorie content and better shelf stability. But with their rise has come controversy, particularly regarding their safety. Many consumers are now wary of any "additives" that aren’t considered natural. So how did we get here, and what are the alternatives for those who prefer a cleaner, more natural approach?

Sweeteners: A Complicated History

Artificial sweeteners became widely used during the world wars when sugar production declined due to agricultural shortages. However, they have actually been around for much longer. Saccharin, for example, was discovered in 1879 when a scientist who hadn’t properly washed his hands after a day in the lab noticed his dinner bread tasted unusually sweet¹.

As concerns over sugar intake and obesity grew, artificial sweeteners became even more popular, promising sweetness without the calories. Initially, they were seen as safe and effective, but over time, some became embroiled in controversy. Various artificial sweeteners have been linked—sometimes accurately, sometimes sensationally—to health concerns such as increased risk of cancer, diabetes, DNA damage, behavioral disorders, neurological issues and risk of  premature birth^2,3,4,5,6. While some of these risks have been overstated or misrepresented, others remain the subject of ongoing scientific debate. These scientific debates can result in regulations around the use of these additives varying between countries with some sweeteners banned in certain places while being approved elsewhere, further complicating consumer perceptions.

Even those considered safe after years of rigorous testing continue to attract scrutiny as our understanding of human biology evolves. For instance, we now know that taste receptors aren’t just in the mouth—they’re also found throughout the digestive tract. While you won’t "taste" something in your stomach or intestines, stimulating these receptors may have implications for metabolic control and reward signaling in the brain, potentially influencing the risk of metabolic diseases like cardiovascular disease⁷. As the most widely used artificial sweetener currently, sucralose has become a focus of many studies on potential metabolic effects of artificial sweeteners with suggestions that it can affect blood sugar levels by reducing insulin sensitivity via their interactions with sweet receptors in the gut^8,9 or may even affect thyroid hormone levels¹⁰ (important for controlling metabolic rate).

Given this complexity and uncertainty, it’s no surprise that many consumers prefer to avoid artificial sweeteners altogether.

Gums and Thickeners: Are They a Concern?

Health concerns around additives aren’t limited to sweeteners. Thickeners and gums—used to improve mouthfeel and product stability—are now also under scrutiny. While generally regarded as safe, some have raised concerns about digestive health and inflammation.

Carrageenan, in particular, has been controversial. Some studies suggest certain types may aggravate intestinal inflammation worsening digestive issues¹¹. However, critics argue that much of the research linking carrageenan to digestive issues is based on studies using "degraded" carrageenan, which is different from the food-grade version approved for consumption¹². This ongoing debate adds to consumer confusion and mistrust.

Other gums and thickeners have not attracted the same level of controversy and are generally considered safe for the majority of people. However, they have been shown in animal models to slow digestive rates, and if consumed in high enough doses can affect the speed and efficiency at which food is broken down and absorbed by the body.¹³ Also, some vulnerable populations—such as infants, young children, and the elderly—may need to avoid them due to sensitive digestive tracts, specific medical concerns, or the use of medications such as Metformin.^14,15,16,17.

What’s the Alternative?

With all this in mind, it’s easy to see why "free from" products attract such loyal followings. Choosing products with only natural ingredients and flavors is a simple way to avoid the often confusing and contradictory debates over safety.

Thankfully, there are now natural alternatives to sugar that don’t require artificial processing. One promising option is "sweet proteins" like Thaumatin. These naturally occurring proteins taste sweet to humans despite containing no sugar. Like artificial sweeteners, they are far sweeter than sugar, meaning only tiny amounts are needed. Additionally, Thaumatin enhances other flavors, allowing natural ingredients like cocoa powder, freeze-dried berries, or vanilla seeds to shine without the need for artificial flavoring.

By using these innovations, it’s now possible to create truly "all-natural" products that taste just as good—if not better—than artificially sweetened and flavored alternatives. This means you can enjoy great-tasting products without unnecessary additives or the uncertainty surrounding artificial ingredients. When you choose natural, you can feel confident that you’re fueling your body with real food, free from unnecessary complexities and controversies.

References

1. Czarnecka, K., Pilarz, A., Rogut, A., Maj, P., Szymańska, J., Olejnik, Ł., & Szymański, P. (2021). Aspartame—True or False? Narrative Review of Safety Analysis of General Use in Products. Nutrients, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13061957.
2. Magnuson, B. A., Roberts, A., & Nestmann, E. R. (2017). Critical review of the current literature on the safety of sucralose. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 106, 324-355.
3. Humphries, P., Pretorius, E., & Naude, H. (2008). Direct and indirect cellular effects of aspartame on the brain. European journal of clinical nutrition, 62(4), 451-462.
4. Hanawa, Y., Higashiyama, M., Kurihara, C., Tanemoto, R., Ito, S., Mizoguchi, A., ... & Hokari, R. (2021). Acesulfame potassium induces dysbiosis and intestinal injury with enhanced lymphocyte migration to intestinal mucosa. Journal of gastroenterology and hepatology, 36(11), 3140-3148.
5. Choudhary, A. K., & Lee, Y. Y. (2018). The debate over neurotransmitter interaction in aspartame usage. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience, 56, 7-15.
6. Chiang, Y. F., Chen, H. Y., Lai, Y. H., Ali, M., Chen, Y. C., & Hsia, S. M. (2022). Consumption of Artificial Sweetener Acesulfame Potassium Increases Preterm Risk and Uterine Contraction with Calcium Influx Increased via Myosin Light Chain Kinase–Myosin Light Chain 20 Related Signaling Pathway. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, 66(20), 2200298.
7. Risdon, S., Battault, S., Romo-Romo, A., Roustit, M., Briand, L., Meyer, G., ... & Walther, G. (2021). Sucralose and cardiometabolic health: current understanding from receptors to clinical investigations. Advances in Nutrition, 12(4), 1500-1513.
8. Omran, A., Ahearn, G., Bowers, D., Swenson, J., & Coughlin, C. (2013). Metabolic effects of sucralose on environmental bacteria. Journal of toxicology, 2013(1), 372986.
9. Shi, Q., Xu, L., Cai, L., Deng, S., & Qi, X. (2024). Sucralose regulates postprandial blood glucose in mice through intestinal sweet taste receptors Tas1r2/Tas1r3. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 104(4), 2233-2244.
10. Oliynyk, O. (2021). The influence of sucralose on thyroid gland function. Health Problems of Civilization, 15(1), 12-16.
11. Liu, F., Hou, P., Zhang, H., Tang, Q., Xue, C., & Li, R. W. (2021). Food‐grade carrageenans and their implications in health and disease. Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety, 20(4), 3918-3936.
12. McKim, J. M., Willoughby, J. A., Blakemore, W. R., & Weiner, M. L. (2019). Gastrointestinal tract digestion and carrageenan: how misconceptions have influenced the understanding of carrageenan safety. J. Nutr. Biol, 5, 364-376.
13. Owusu-Asiedu, A. J. F. J., Patience, J. F., Laarveld, B., Van Kessel, A. G., Simmins, P. H., & Zijlstra, R. T. (2006). Effects of guar gum and cellulose on digesta passage rate, ileal microbial populations, energy and protein digestibility, and performance of grower pigs. Journal of animal science, 84(4), 843-852.
14. David, S., Levi, C. S., Fahoum, L., Ungar, Y., Meyron-Holtz, E. G., Shpigelman, A., & Lesmes, U. (2018). Revisiting the carrageenan controversy: do we really understand the digestive fate and safety of carrageenan in our foods?. Food & function, 9(3), 1344-1352.
15. EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS), Mortensen, A., Aguilar, F., Crebelli, R., Di Domenico, A., Frutos, M. J., ... & Dusemund, B. (2017). Re‐evaluation of xanthan gum (E 415) as a food additive. EFSA Journal, 15(7), e04909.
16. EFSA Panel on Food Additives Nutrient Sources added to Food (ANS), Mortensen, A., Aguilar, F., Crebelli, R., Di Domenico, A., Frutos, M. J., ... & Dusemund, B. (2017). Re‐evaluation of locust bean gum (E 410) as a food additive. Efsa Journal, 15(1), e04646.
17. Gin, H., Orgerie, M. B., & Aubertin, J. (1989). The influence of guar gum on absorption of metformin from the gut in healthy volunteers. Hormone and Metabolic Research, 21(02), 81-83.