[HN Gopher] Sweetener saccharin shows surprise power against ant...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Sweetener saccharin shows surprise power against antibiotic
       resistance
        
       Author : XzetaU8
       Score  : 99 points
       Date   : 2025-04-05 14:07 UTC (3 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.brunel.ac.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.brunel.ac.uk)
        
       | ninetyninenine wrote:
       | Isn't saccharine toxic?
        
         | jinwoo68 wrote:
         | I think so. Seems also toxic to bacteria!
        
         | boxed wrote:
         | The dose makes the poison. It doesn't sound THAT toxic, but
         | enough to be a bad idea for sweeteners. But I'd bet the
         | antibiotic itself has more toxicity!
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saccharin
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | There were some suspected links to cancer but they were found
         | to not be a risk at normal intake levels.
        
         | nottorp wrote:
         | So is any prescription pill if you're not respecting the dosage
         | the docs prescribed...
        
         | ignoramous wrote:
         | It is banned in India for Ice Creams & frozen Lollies / Ice
         | Pops, but allowed within limit for general use (soda, bubble
         | gums, packaged juice, etc).                 Health department
         | officials said, "Saccharin is harmful to children especially
         | those under 14 years. It affects bones badly. These ice candies
         | are sold in rural areas and their sale picks up during summer"
         | Some ice cream producers prefer to use saccharin as it is quite
         | cheaper in comparison to sugar. To earn heavy profits during
         | summer when the demand for ice candies goes up significantly,
         | some of the ice cream producers use saccharin. Officials said
         | that saccharin is more than 300 times sweeter than sucrose
         | (sugar), the officials said.
         | 
         | https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/ice-cream-pr...
         | / https://archive.vn/wRTE5
        
       | teslabox wrote:
       | Saccharin was the first artificial sweetener, discovered in 1879.
       | It was popular in the early 20th century, and is available today
       | as Sweet'n'Low or "the pink packet" (generics). The chemical has
       | an advocacy group: https://saccharin.org/ - the latest news is
       | that Canadians can now use saccharin too (2016). Walmart and
       | Amazon have boxes of bulk sweet'n'low for baking/etc.
       | 
       | ~4 weeks ago I reposted a submission about Aspartame: _Aspartame
       | aggravates atherosclerosis through insulin-triggered inflammation
       | (sciencedirect.com)_ -
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43313574
       | 
       | My comment tried to put saccharin, aspartame, acesulfame
       | potassium and sucralose into context. Aspartame is not heat
       | stable, so it's often combined with acesulfame-K. The diet soda
       | industry standardized on aspartame in the 1980's because
       | saccharin has a metallic aftertaste.
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43313575
       | 
       | I think saccharin is probably the safest of all the artificial
       | sweeteners. Stevia and monk fruit extracts (herbal sweeteners)
       | are probably okay too, as long as you're not allergic to them.
       | 
       | If you want to try saccharin-sweetened beverages, I've noticed
       | that zero sugar tonic waters at my local grocery store (brand
       | name and generic) use saccharin.
        
         | Centigonal wrote:
         | One important thing to mention about the history of saccharin
         | is that it was the subject of a big scare in the 70s and 80s
         | because rat studies showed it caused cancer. Later research
         | revealed that the link between saccharin and cancer was much
         | more tenuous in humans than originally suggested, and the
         | sweetener is generally considered safe today.
        
           | tasty_freeze wrote:
           | When I was a kid in the 70s, our pantry had a bottle of
           | saccharine tablets that my folks would use to sweeten their
           | coffee. They were tiny, not big tablets, more like round
           | little pills. They had an uncanny resemblance to a popular
           | breath mint product.
           | 
           | A common prank was to put some saccharine pills in one of
           | those mint dispensers, walk up to a sibling and asked if they
           | wanted one while putting a real mint in your mouth. They'd
           | take one of the fake mints, put it in their mouth, and half a
           | second later curse you as they ran to the sink to spit it
           | out.
        
             | washadjeffmad wrote:
             | I still have a little bottle of those, sold under the brand
             | "Aids".
        
         | SoftTalker wrote:
         | All these artificial sweeteners taste terrible to me. A very
         | "chemical" taste and especially smell to all of them, reminds
         | me of insecticide. For carbonated beverages, I prefer plain
         | carbonated water, though sometimes I will buy a flavored (but
         | unsweetened) variety.
        
           | 9283409232 wrote:
           | I've settled on no sugar or under 3g of sugar for this
           | reason. They all taste weird to me. Monk fruit, stevia,
           | aspartame, saccharin, allulose, sucralose. All of them.
        
           | BobaFloutist wrote:
           | They taste weird to me too but I'm not convinced it's an
           | absolute quality rather than just unfamiliarity
        
         | analog31 wrote:
         | I'm only quibbling here, and I agree with you, but an amusing
         | factoid is that the ancient Romans used lead acetate as an
         | artificial sweetener. It was made by boiling wine in a lead
         | pot.
         | 
         | When I lived in Texas, it was practically universal to open up
         | a cup of iced tea, grab several packs of Sweet'n'Low, rip the
         | tops off all at once, and pour them in.
        
           | sorcerer-mar wrote:
           | With Sweet'n'Low?! Isn't that considered blasphemy in sweet
           | tea country?
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | That's a good question, and I'm culturally ignorant. When I
             | lived in Texas, my impression was that "tea" was
             | unsweetened iced tea, to which people added their own
             | sweetener. Then when I visited Virginia, "tea" was heavily
             | sweetened.
             | 
             | My friend told me that drinking coffee with a meal
             | instantly identified me as a Midwesterner.
        
         | chasil wrote:
         | Google Gemini is telling me:
         | 
         | "Saccharin is absorbed primarily in the stomach, with about 85%
         | to 95% of ingested saccharin absorbed and eliminated in the
         | urine."
         | 
         | If this is the case, then why hasn't the antibiotic effect been
         | previously observed in vivo?
         | 
         | Is the concentration too low?
        
         | latchkey wrote:
         | My problem with monk fruit extracts is that they tend to be
         | full of erythritol (even listing them as the first ingredient
         | [0]), which tends to wreck my stomach. I was in a super market
         | once and not a single product on the shelf was pure monk fruit.
         | 
         | [0] https://www.amazon.com/RAW-Natural-Sweetener-Erythritol-
         | Suga...
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | I think they're using erythritol because it's not toxic to
           | pets which some of the other sugar alcohols are, and
           | disastrously so.
           | 
           | But all of the sugar alcohols can mess with your gut biome.
           | Mine went nasty during the previous recession when I was
           | chewing gum for TMJ related problems.
        
             | latchkey wrote:
             | I'm confused, google says monk fruit is ok for pets.
             | Regardless, who's feeding this stuff to their pets?
             | 
             | I love fishermans friend, but I think the sorbitol is
             | guaranteed excessive flatulence.
        
               | Centigonal wrote:
               | Monkfruit doesn't come in a nice, familiar crystal form,
               | and monkfruit extract is much sweeter per gram than
               | sugar. For this reason, manufacturers bulk it up with
               | some kind of sugar alcohol to make it easier to use. GP
               | is saying they use erythritol for this purpose because
               | the other options (e.g. xylitol) are toxic to pets.
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | When you live with a pet, who eats what food is a bit of
               | a democratic affair, not an autocracy.
               | 
               | Do you want to get up from the middle of a movie to go to
               | the bathroom and come back and find that you're not going
               | to find out who killed the leading lady tonight because
               | you're going to spend all night in an animal emergency
               | room getting your dog or cat's stomach pumped?
               | 
               | Anything on a table or in your purse or your jacket
               | pocket is fair game.
        
             | officeplant wrote:
             | - I was chewing gum for TMJ related problems.
             | 
             | Why the hell would you do that? My life time of chewing gum
             | constantly until my 20s is what I assume to be the source
             | of my TMJ.
        
               | hinkley wrote:
               | Grinding my teeth at night, because I wanted to murder a
               | third of my coworkers and I didn't feel I could find
               | another job.
        
         | majkinetor wrote:
         | Xylitol is probably safer, and it also kills smutans.
        
       | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
       | Hate the taste of the stuff, but glad to hear this.
       | 
       | Wonder if some megacorp will try to patent some formulation of
       | it.
        
         | Obscurity4340 wrote:
         | Saccharin adderallide
        
       | jader201 wrote:
       | These days, about the only liquid you can consume without
       | controversy is water.
       | 
       | Some say coffee is good for you (in moderation), some say it's
       | bad for you.
       | 
       | Some say certain alcoholic drinks are good for you (in
       | moderation), some say no amount of alcohol is good.
       | 
       | Some say some artificial sweeteners have benefits, some say all
       | of them are toxic.
       | 
       | Some think fruit juices are good for you, because fruit. Some
       | (most) say they're bad for you.
       | 
       | Some say fruit smoothies are good for you, because the fiber
       | content outweighs the downside of fructose/natural sugars. But
       | some say all fruit sugar is bad for you.
       | 
       | The only thing that we seem to agree on, is that any sort of
       | beverage containing sucrose is bad for you. But maybe I missed
       | some thread where sucrose in moderation actually has health
       | benefits.
       | 
       | I guess I'll stick to drinking water. But I'm sure there's a
       | reason why that's bad for me.
        
         | butlike wrote:
         | In worrying about it all you miss all the earthly delights AND
         | you STILL don't live forever
        
         | anonzzzies wrote:
         | People worry about where the drinking water is from and how
         | it's transported etc as well. Whatever you do, you will die
         | soon-ish. I prefer to enjoy the journey.
        
         | mentalgear wrote:
         | Haha, you made me chuckle. But to the facts: the article and
         | application is about directly applying it to the wound or
         | antibiotics directly. No one is advocating for it to be part of
         | a healthy diet.
        
         | ender341341 wrote:
         | > Some say certain alcoholic drinks are good for you (in
         | moderation), some say no amount of alcohol is good.
         | 
         | From what I've read it seems likely that any amount of alcohol
         | is bad for you, most of the studies that show moderate as good
         | for you make the mistake of only have 'sober', 'moderate' &
         | 'heavy' drinking, but if you look at the 'sober' folks there's
         | a heavy mix of "I don't drink because I'm in recovery" or other
         | health issues, so if you instead of 'sober by choice', 'sober
         | by recovery/health issues', 'moderate' & 'heavy drinker' the
         | benefit of moderation reverses to being worse than 'sober by
         | choice'.
         | 
         | Almost any "this bad for you thing is actually good for you in
         | moderation" basically seem to come down to:
         | 
         | People who can do common addictive things in moderation tend to
         | also be good at moderating other bad factors too.
        
           | ashoeafoot wrote:
           | It depends ? Has your line adapted to alcohol, like other
           | lines adapted to milk?
        
           | omnimus wrote:
           | Alcohol is bad for your body but can be quite good for your
           | mood. Just like sugar or othe high calory food.
        
         | meroes wrote:
         | But if the water has fluoride...maybe that's making your teeth
         | brittle! (Or worse if you're condemned to believe RFK types)
        
         | leoh wrote:
         | >I guess I'll stick to drinking water. But I'm sure there's a
         | reason why that's bad for me.
         | 
         | Micro-plastics, fluoride.. ;)
        
         | bko wrote:
         | Naw, that's just big waters psy-op getting you to buy their
         | nectar to fill up the Pacific ocean with plastic.
         | 
         | In all seriousness, I met people that essentially don't drink
         | water. They get water through food. Give them a glass during
         | dinner and it goes untouched. I don't think it's because
         | they're lazy and don't want to get up and fill up their water.
         | It's just that they're not thirsty. It's really quite
         | fascinating
        
         | Galatians4_16 wrote:
         | > These days, about the only liquid you can consume without
         | controversy is water.
         | 
         | Tapwater, or artesian well water?
         | 
         | Magnitically left-spun water, or ionically charged crystal-
         | dipped water?
         | 
         | Hermetically sealed water, or Gnostically gestated water?
         | 
         | Distilled or deionated?
         | 
         | Choose wisely.
        
         | queuebert wrote:
         | The residents of Flint, MI, might disagree with you.
        
         | nineplay wrote:
         | The 'no fruit juice' thing really got on my nerves when my kids
         | were little since people just throw it out with no
         | qualifications. So really, if I cut up some oranges and squeeze
         | the juice into a cup I can't give it to my kid because fruit =
         | sugar = bad? It's such a reductionist way to look at food and
         | nutrition.
         | 
         | I also recently had a PT tell me that blending fruit into
         | smoothies removes all the nutritional value, which is why no
         | one should get nutritional advice heath professionals who are
         | not nutritionists.
        
           | JumpCrisscross wrote:
           | > _if I cut up some oranges and squeeze the juice into a cup
           | I can 't give it to my kid_
           | 
           | Nobody was seriously arguing against fresh-squeezed juices
           | (especially when served with the pulp).
        
             | timcobb wrote:
             | With pulp we're getting somewhere, but without pulp?
        
               | damnesian wrote:
               | there is still the folate and magnesium citrate. and of
               | course vitamin c. It's not completely useless without
               | pulp.
        
             | colechristensen wrote:
             | >Nobody was seriously arguing against fresh-squeezed juices
             | (especially when served with the pulp).
             | 
             | Yes they are.
             | 
             | And when it comes down to it a little bit of fiber
             | especially when something has been aggressively mashed up,
             | doesn't make your orange juice all that different from a
             | Mtn Dew. Fructose is fructose and no amount of magical
             | extras is going to make that big of a difference on its
             | metabolic effects.
             | 
             | I say that but I'm _not_ advocating you to not drink juice.
             | Just balance your inputs.
        
             | nineplay wrote:
             | People below you in this thread are saying that fresh
             | squeezed orange juice is little better than Mountain Dew.
             | Something about nutrition makes people lose their minds.
        
               | smt88 wrote:
               | They are correct in terms of nutrition and sugar, but
               | most kids can process a lot of sugar fine.
               | 
               | Fruit has also been bred to be much sweeter and less
               | nutritious than it was 50 years ago, so there's that too.
               | 
               | Moderation is the key to everything.
        
               | nineplay wrote:
               | I agree but no one makes headlines or sells books by
               | talking about nuance and moderation so we get terrible
               | advice from magazines and 'professionals' and all get
               | steadily less healthy.
        
               | JumpCrisscross wrote:
               | > _fresh squeezed orange juice is little better than
               | Mountain Dew_
               | 
               | A reasonable way to look at it is as a flat, fortified
               | Mountain Dew. Great as a treat. Bad as a habit, at least
               | with modern oranges.
        
               | nineplay wrote:
               | That is an impossibly stupid way to look at it. Food is
               | not just a bunch of numbers on a label.
        
               | wao0uuno wrote:
               | By squeezing juice out of an orange you're separating the
               | unhealthy stuff from the healthy stuff. Healthy stuff
               | then gets thrown away. Some juice every now and then
               | won't hurt anyone but it's not healthy to drink it every
               | day.
        
           | colechristensen wrote:
           | >I also recently had a PT tell me that blending fruit into
           | smoothies removes all the nutritional value, which is why no
           | one should get nutritional advice heath professionals who are
           | not nutritionists.
           | 
           | I'd just suggest nobody get nutritional advice. Really so
           | much of it is just nonsense and there's no good advice in my
           | opinion outside "eat a variety of food in moderation" unless
           | you have specific health problems. If a health professional
           | told me that blending fruit into smoothies removes
           | nutritional value I'd make it a point to try to get them
           | fired. (I have gotten healthcare professionals fired, but for
           | more serious stupid statements)
        
             | nineplay wrote:
             | I don't entirely disagree but my kid was with me and I feel
             | like I need someone now to reassure her that blending
             | doesn't magically remove vitamins from food.
             | 
             | ( I asked her if blending tomatoes for sauce removed the
             | nutritional value but that's different for reasons that no
             | one understands. )
             | 
             | I'm with you. Eat a variety of food and as close to the
             | natural source as possible. If you think that orange juice
             | and mountain dew are the same because of sugar content than
             | you've lost the plot.
        
           | timcobb wrote:
           | > So really, if I cut up some oranges and squeeze the juice
           | into a cup I can't give it to my kid because fruit = sugar =
           | bad? It's such a reductionist way to look at food and
           | nutrition.
           | 
           | Sorta? It's not _bad_ , right? But it has not much
           | nutritional value, and spikes their glycemic index, which is
           | probably fine but... why? I guess it does taste good...
        
             | nineplay wrote:
             | Because no one wants to drink water all day every day and
             | nothing else.
        
               | amarcheschi wrote:
               | It probably has to do with not being American, but at
               | least here in italy it's completely fine to drink water
               | and only that on a regular day. I do give that there's
               | probably more variety, I know some people having
               | preferences for certain bottled waters over others
               | 
               | (I'll gladly drink whatever water I find, but I'm not a
               | fan of the plastic taste of some bottled waters and
               | definitely a hater of refrigerator-cold water)
               | 
               | From my holidays in the US I recall shops, even small
               | ones, having lots of drinks. Like, shelves and shelves of
               | any alcohol free drink (and some abv ones) one could
               | imagine. Here I go to my neighborhood small supermarket
               | and there's coke, lemonade, Fanta, tonic water, a few
               | local products such as spuma and that's it
        
               | nineplay wrote:
               | I drink water in the US every day just fine, I don't
               | think there's anything cultural going on here.
               | 
               | No one drinks coffee or tea or beer or wine in Italy? Pop
               | culture has deceived me.
        
               | amarcheschi wrote:
               | Oh well coffee is definitely a given for a lot of
               | Italians lol. Tea as well although less spread than
               | coffee. I was talking more about drinks taken in cans or
               | bigger quantities than a coffee/cup of tea.
               | 
               | Wine is definitely more prevalent in the older gens,
               | young people drink albeit less. Up until a few years ago
               | - and in some older people is valid for today as well -
               | there was the belief that a small glass of wine a day
               | wouldn't do harm, or that it had a positive effect on
               | your health...
               | 
               | So yeah, alcohol is often on the table, but there's much
               | less choice about the variety of drinks compared in the
               | us. Then, if you have to work in the afternoon you might
               | choose to not drink alcohol, so you're stuck with water
               | or the other more common soft drinks such as coke (...)
        
               | nineplay wrote:
               | I'm specifically sympathetic to kids who are not ( in the
               | US ) given coffee or tea or alcohol and still get scolded
               | about having anything but water. I've been there, it gets
               | dull.
        
               | amarcheschi wrote:
               | Well, even small kids here are allowed by their parents
               | to drink caffe latte, which is milk with varying amounts
               | of coffee. Then of course, some juices are OK although
               | it's so easy to drink much more than the rda (and I'm
               | quite sure I drank a shitton more of the recommend dose
               | of juice, the few times I drank juice)
        
               | wao0uuno wrote:
               | I don't see anything wrong with drinking only water.
        
               | nineplay wrote:
               | Nothing is wrong with drinking only water. Nothing is
               | wrong with drinking something besides water.
        
           | MyOutfitIsVague wrote:
           | > if I cut up some oranges and squeeze the juice into a cup I
           | can't give it to my kid because fruit = sugar = bad?
           | 
           | Yeah, that's fine, but a 16 ounce glass of orange juice has
           | way more than one orange in it, and it's got a hell of a lot
           | of sugar.
        
           | ch4s3 wrote:
           | The real issue with fruit juice is that you can easily
           | consume the juice of several pieces of fruit all at once and
           | in a form that makes the sugar rapidly available so you get
           | insulin spikes. The serving size for children of juice is
           | 4-6oz which isn't very much volume, so its super easy to over
           | do it.
           | 
           | If you eat the whole fruit that sugar s bound up with fiber
           | so you don't consume as much as easily and you digest it more
           | slowly. Fiber plays a key role in satiety (feeling full) and
           | stripped of fiber its easy to consume too many calories. A
           | whole orange contains 3-6x the fiber of the equivalent volume
           | of orange juice with pulp.
        
           | BoingBoomTschak wrote:
           | Or just do like me and switch to grapefruit juice. Awesome
           | without drinking pure liquid sugar.
        
         | colechristensen wrote:
         | How about we agree that people making food controversial are
         | the problem and we can just ignore them. It's like they have a
         | religion that refreshes its beliefs on a 5 year cycle.
        
           | ashoeafoot wrote:
           | A secular religion, replacing a million
           | ourFatherWhoYouAreInHeaven to prevent the dwindling disease,
           | with a milliin microfastings.. it lacks the little whips for
           | self flaggelation though.
        
         | sionisrecur wrote:
         | Sorry, water has microplastics now.
        
           | ashoeafoot wrote:
           | The only way to prevent it, is to go full recycle, become a
           | human bottle garden .
        
         | RC_ITR wrote:
         | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4109571/
         | 
         | We don't even know if _tiny doses or artificial radiation_ are
         | good or bad for you.
         | 
         | That's the straw that just pushed me to live my life.
        
         | deepGem wrote:
         | I guess I'll stick to drinking water. But I'm sure there's a
         | reason why that's bad for me.
         | 
         | Here's one :)
         | 
         | Too much water also erodes your body of salts. If you already
         | are on a low salt diet this could be a problem. For us Indians
         | eating mountain loads of salt, this is a non issue.
        
         | jgalt212 wrote:
         | Probably the flouride, but RFK will sort that out.
        
           | michaelteter wrote:
           | Unfortunately on HN these days, it's impossible to tell if
           | this is sarcasm or not.
        
         | voidfunc wrote:
         | At some point you realize almost all of these studies are
         | pointless and you're talking about shaving or adding negligible
         | amounts of time off your life while ignoring more serious risks
         | like driving or inhaling smog and brake dust daily. It's not an
         | excuse to go crazy and eat and drink total shit, but I've
         | largely given up on modern medicine and nutrition having any
         | fucking clue beyond calories in / calories out.
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | Well at least it's not in vitro. Everything kills bacteria in a
       | Petri dish.
       | 
       | But it is topical. So it may do a treat for MRSA but not for
       | resistant pneumonia.
        
         | pshirshov wrote:
         | There is a vaccine, which works against SA (including MRSA of
         | course) as both a prevention and a cure:
         | https://www.eapteka.ru/goods/id123804/ The old and mostly
         | unknown legacy of the Soviet medicine. $50 per 20 doses.
        
       | pfdietz wrote:
       | The paper describe the effect at 1.4% saccharine in solution.
       | 
       | The oral LD50 in mice is 17 g/kg.
       | https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Saccharin#section=...
       | 
       |  _Maybe_ ok for topical application?
        
       | arijo wrote:
       | All sweeteners are considered harmful.
       | 
       | Please watch the video:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kkyv1o8Xp_M
        
         | mateus1 wrote:
         | This guy advocates for 0 sugar intake, which seems like a very
         | fringe opinion...
        
       | profsummergig wrote:
       | The gut biome thing.
       | 
       | There have been murmurs on the conspiracy internet about how
       | artificial sweeteners may have been responsible for making gut
       | biomes less effective.
       | 
       | This seems related. The gut biome refers to bacteria in the gut.
        
         | Beijinger wrote:
         | https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/artificial-sweete...
        
         | gyudin wrote:
         | I wouldn't be surprised. Living in US more and more of my
         | immigrant friends discover severe food sensitivities that
         | they've never experienced before.
        
       | pshirshov wrote:
       | > Saccharin breaks the walls of bacterial pathogens, causing them
       | to distort and eventually burst, killing the bacteri
       | 
       | Sugar, salt, kerosene and, for example, ethanol, do the same.
       | What is special about saccharin?
        
         | smt88 wrote:
         | You can't put the other things you've listed on a wound in a
         | hospital without some, uh... unpleasantness.
        
           | pshirshov wrote:
           | Sure thing you can put sugar or, for example, colloidal
           | silver (an awesome option!).
        
           | masfuerte wrote:
           | I don't fancy kerosene much. Sugar works very well [1]. Salt
           | and ethanol are very effective in mouthwashes, though ethanol
           | is carcinogenic. I stick to the salt.
           | 
           | [1]: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20180328-how-sugar-
           | could-...
        
             | smt88 wrote:
             | Salt is painful and I believe the risk with sugar is that
             | it can be metabolized by bacteria or fungi, so the remnants
             | of it can make conditions better for microbes (although I
             | haven't googled to confirm this)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-08 23:01 UTC)