American Council on Science and Health American Council on Science and Health
About
ACSH
¥ Contact
ACSH
¥ Support
ACSH
¥ My
ACSH
¥ Advanced
Search
 
ACSH.org   Home   . .   Health Issues   . .   News Center   . .   Publications   . .   Events   . .   FactsAndFears   .  

Health Facts And Fears

Archives >

Printer Format icon Printer Format
E-mail Information icon E-mail Information
February 13, 2008

Reminder: People Are Not Rats

By Ruth Kava, Ph.D., R.D.

It's rather obvious that people are not rats, but there must be some confusion as many news outlets are trumpeting the results of a rat feeding study as though they could be applied directly to humans. Major newspapers and TV stations, as well as various Internet outlets have posted headlines stating or suggesting that the non-caloric sweetener saccharin can lead to weight gain. What gives? Are there really data substantiating such a conclusion, or was it just a slow news day?

The research in question, by scientists at Purdue University, examined the effect of sweet tasting foods -- both artificially sweetened by saccharin and sweetened by glucose -- on the number of calories rats consumed subsequently. The researchers were examining the hypothesis that when a sweet-tasting food didn’t have calories, the animals' energy-control system would be affected, and the rats would eat more calories at subsequent meals. Thus, after consuming saccharin-containing foods, the animals would have a propensity to gain weight and excess body fat.

In this study, the test food was low-fat, plain yogurt. The rats were divided into three groups: one group got yogurt that was sweetened with glucose (caloric sweetener); one group's yogurt was sweetened with saccharin (non-caloric sweetener); the third group's yogurt was unsweetened. The animals were given the yogurts six days per week for five weeks, and at the end of that period their body composition was determined. The researchers found that, indeed, the animals who had eaten the saccharin-sweetened yogurt ended up weighing more and also had more body fat than the other rats. So the results of the study seemed to support their hypothesis. But what does that have to do with people?

There are problems with extrapolating the results of this study to humans. First, the sweet stimulus was glucose, not the sucrose (table sugar) that people typically use -- and glucose is much less sweet than table sugar. And perhaps more important, there are good data indicating that people don't regulate their calorie intake -- we regulate the volume of food we consume. That is, when we eat enough to feel full, we stop eating. That's why eating foods containing a lot of water and fiber (plant foods) is a good scheme to help people control their weight.

Finally, it's well-known that people's food intake is influenced by a host of social and environmental factors -- ones that just wouldn't apply to rats isolated in cages.

So for all these reasons, it's extremely unlikely that the results of this study could realistically be applied to people. What’s hard to understand is why it generated as much media attention as it did.


Ruth Kava, Ph.D., R.D., is Director of Nutrition at the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH.org, HealthFactsAndFears.com).

Visitor Responses

Lance_K (February 14, 2008)

Dr. Kava's points are spot on. I would add also that I can't think of any food item that if it represented a human’s sole dietary source would not create some sort of adverse effect in the long term. I understand the logic that feeding the rats only one kind of food item was done to minimize interactions, but could not the homogeneity of their diet, of itself, produce adverse affects?


Drawing of Todd Seavey


About the Editor:
Todd Seavey

is Director of Publications at ACSH and edits FactsAndFears.  His opinions are not necessarily ACSH's.

He can be reached at seavey [at] acsh.org.

Subscribe to ACSH.org RSS  FactsAndFears posts on YOUR site
Search Archives Icon for Search
Search

Icon for Browse Archives Browse Archives

Sign In Icon for Sign In

Username:

Password:

Sign In Now >>

Forget your password?

Register

Why register with ACSH?
You'll be able to:
¥ Post comments to articles
¥ Subscribe to e-bulletin
¥ Receive immediate or scheduled updates


Register Now >>

¥ (from ACSH) theScooponSmoking.org
¥ aBetterEarth.org
¥ AgBioWorld
¥ American Justice Partnership
¥ Anti-Quackery and Science Blog
¥ Anti-Quackery Ring
¥ BiomonitoringInfo.org
¥ Blogborygmi.com (Nick Gene & co.)
¥ CalorieLab
¥ The Cancer Blog
¥ CAST on transgenic animals
¥ Catallarchy (econ, etc.)
¥ Competitive Enterprise Institute
¥ ConsumerFreedom.com
¥ Debunkers.org
¥ Diet-Blog.com
¥ Dynamist/Virginia Postrel
¥ Fishscam
¥ Freakonomics
¥ GruntDoc
¥ Health Beat (medical news/research)
¥ Health Business Blog
¥ Health Intelligence Network blog
¥ In the Pipeline (drugs per Derek Lowe)
¥ Infography on Medical Care: Quacks, Quackery
¥ Institute of Ideas
¥ JunkScience.com (Steve Milloy)
¥ MedMusings
¥ National Council Against Health Fraud
¥ Overlawyered.com
¥ ParkinsonsHealth
¥ Quackbusters
¥ Quackfiles
¥ Quackfiles.blogspot.com
¥ Quackwatch
¥ James Randi, ultimate skeptic
¥ Rangel, M.D.
¥ Reason (including Seavey pieces)
¥ SAGEcrossroads.net (aging)
¥ Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine
¥ Science Media Centre
¥ Sense About Science
¥ Skeptic Magazine
¥ Skeptic Ring
¥ Skeptical Inquirer/CSICOP
¥ Spiked-Online
¥ TCS Daily (Europe)
¥ TCS Daily (U.S.)
¥ 3 Billion and Counting (malaria docu. w/Ross)
¥ Tobacco Survivors United
¥ TobaccoAnalysis blog
¥ Urban Legends per Snopes
¥ US News Best Health Heart Center
¥ US News Lung Cancer Center
¥ Volokh.com (blog on law, econ, polisci)
¥ Washington Legal Foundation
¥ WhyBiotech (Council for Biotechnology Info.)
¥ WhyQuit.com (case studies, message boards, etc.)
¥ Dr. Carl Winter (health song-parodies)
¥ aWorldConnected.org (benefits of globalization)


TO VIEW AND MAKE COMMENTS ON THE ARTICLES ABOVE (OR OTHERS), "SIGN IN" AT THE RIGHT MARGIN.

AMERICAN COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND HEALTH  |  1995 BROADWAY, 2ND FLOOR, NEW YORK, NY 10023-5860
TELEPHONE: (212) 362-7044  |  FAX: (212) 362-4919  |  E-MAIL: GEN. ORGANIZATION MAILBOX: acsh (at) acsh.org; IND. STAFFER: [last name or last name followed by first initial]@acsh.org 

Copyright © 1997-2004 American Council on Science and Health  |  Privacy Policy  |  All Rights Reserved
.

Founded in 1978, ACSH is a consumer advocacy organization directed and advised by over 350 physicians, scientists and policy advisors. ACSH promotes the use of sound, peer-reviewed science in the formation of a full  spectrum of  public health policies, including those related to food, pharmaceuticals, environmental chemicals, lifestyle factors, consumer products and terrorism preparedness and response.