HomeArticlesMatt Weik

Artificial Sweeteners and Brain Aging: What We Know So Far

artificial sweeteners

Artificial sweeteners have been popping up a lot lately and in many forms. You’ll find them as liquids or powders, and under names like sucralose, erythritol, and aspartame. Millions of people use artificial sweeteners, especially those managing diabetes.

Personally, while I’m not completely against sugar, I’ll reach for something like a Coke Zero Sugar over a regular Coke every day of the week, and as a sports nutritionist, I’ll even recommend my clients and athletes do the same.

People often switch to these alternatives because they may cause smaller spikes in blood sugar compared to regular sugar. This is what makes them a practical option for those trying to keep their glucose levels stable.

That all being said, regulators have also reviewed their safety. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved several of these sweeteners, including saccharin, sucralose, and aspartame. Sugar alcohols like xylitol and erythritol, along with plant-based options such as stevia and monk fruit, also fall within what’s considered safe for consumption.

But in this article, we need to unpack more on artificial sweeteners and how they affect the brain. More specifically, brain aging.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and should not be used to treat or diagnose any condition. It is recommended that you speak with your doctor before starting any exercise program, making changes to your nutrition plan, or adding any new dietary supplements into your current regimen.

What Are Artificial Sweeteners and How Do They Affect the Brain?

Artificial sweeteners are lab-made compounds that copy the taste of sugar without the calories. Sounds like a good thing, right?

You’ll see names like aspartame, sucralose, saccharin, and stevia, which some people view as more natural. They show up everywhere, from diet sodas to chewing gum to toothpaste. Most people turn to them as an easy way to cut sugar without giving up sweetness.

But they don’t just affect your taste buds.

When you taste something sweet, your brain responds by activating its reward system. Artificial sweeteners trigger that same response, even though they don’t deliver actual calories. I’ve always found that part interesting. Your brain reacts as if it’s getting energy, but nothing really comes in.

Over time, that mismatch may influence how the brain responds to sweetness.

Some studies suggest this could affect memory, focus, and decision-making. They’re generally safe when used in moderation, but the long-term effects on brain function still need more clarity.

 

What Does Science Say?

Research on artificial sweeteners and brain aging is starting to raise some important questions, but the picture remains mixed.

One large study published in Neurology followed over 12,000 adults in Brazil, with an average age of 52, for nearly eight years. Participants reported their dietary habits and later completed tests measuring memory, verbal fluency, and overall cognitive function.

The results showed that those who consumed the highest amounts of low- and no-calorie sweeteners, including aspartame, saccharin, acesulfame-K, erythritol, xylitol, and sorbitol, experienced a 62% faster decline in cognitive abilities compared to those with the lowest intake.

Researchers estimated this decline to be roughly equal to about 1.6 years of additional brain aging. That’s pretty shocking!

Interestingly, this trend was most pronounced among participants under the age of 60, suggesting that middle-aged adults might be more sensitive to these effects.

The study also noted that these sweeteners are commonly found not just in diet sodas but also in products such as flavored water, low-calorie desserts, and energy drinks.

The researchers suggested a possible link between long-term sweetener intake and reduced cognitive performance and even recommended considering alternatives such as natural sweeteners or less-processed options.

I’ll be honest, findings like this do make you pause and rethink how often these products show up in daily diets.

At the same time, it’s important to keep the limitations in mind. This was an observational study, which means it can only show an association, not a direct cause-and-effect (thank goodness).

Industry groups and health authorities continue to maintain that approved sweeteners are safe when consumed within recommended limits, and they point out that these products have helped reduce overall sugar intake in many populations, which can help reduce the risk of becoming overweight or obese.

So right now, the evidence doesn’t give a clear answer. Some data suggest a potential link between high intake of sweeteners and cognitive decline.

However, we still need more controlled research to understand whether these sweeteners directly impact brain health over time.

Finding the Right Balance with Sweeteners

We need to remember that artificial sweeteners aren’t automatically harmful. They can help reduce sugar intake and make things easier if you’re managing certain health conditions.

But if you care about long-term brain health, it makes sense to stay mindful about how often you rely on them.

A few simple shifts can help:

  • Ease back gradually. If you drink a lot of diet soda, swap a few servings for water or herbal tea and let your taste adjust over time.
  • Don’t depend on them for every craving. Whole foods like fruit, or even a small amount of honey, can do the job without the same uncertainty.
  • Pay attention to how you feel. I’ve noticed that small changes in diet can affect focus more than expected. If something feels off, it’s worth adjusting.
  • Build your diet around real food. Vegetables, lean protein, and healthy fats support your brain and body without needing substitutes.

If you want alternatives, stevia or monk fruit can be slightly better options since they’re less processed. You don’t need to cut sweeteners out completely, but using them with some awareness goes a long way.


Author Bio:

Matt Weik, BS, CSCS, CPT, CSN, is a globally recognized health, fitness, and supplement industry expert with over 25 years of hands-on experience. He is the founder of Weik Fitness and one of the most prolific writers in the space, known for translating complex science into clear, actionable content. Matt holds a Bachelor of Science in Kinesiology from Penn State University and multiple industry certifications, giving his work both academic credibility and real-world authority. His writing has been featured on thousands of websites and in 100+ magazines worldwide, including FLEX, Muscular Development, Iron Man, and Muscle & Fitness UK, and he has authored 30+ published books. Trusted by leading supplement brands and media outlets alike, Matt is widely regarded as one of the most knowledgeable and reliable voices in health, fitness, and sports nutrition.

Loading new replies...

Avatar of Arnold
Arnold

☝️ ☮️ 🫶

46,993 messages 30,674 likes

I only use Splenda personally.

Reply Like

N
NextThursday

New Member

8 messages 6 likes

The article mentions that the cohort that drank lots of artificial sweeteners experienced "62% faster" mental decline over time, which it equates to roughly "1.6 years additional aging". The study followed the 12,000 participants for 8 years. This math doesn't add up. Either they're saying the group that drank very little sweetener only aged 2.58 years over the course of an 8 year study, or the additional 1.6 years isn't a 62% faster decline. 162% of 8 years would be 12.96 years of aging total (an increase of 4.96 over the baseline of 8). An increase of 1.6 years (to 9.6 total) over an 8 year baseline would be an increase of 20%.

The other, very real, possibility is that I've simply misunderstood what I read (if so, let me know).

Additionally, in a large, distant observational study like this it's very difficult to control for other, correlated lifestyle and health variables (noise from unrelated variables hopefully wash out in a sample size this large, but correlated behaviors will still show up in the data). How likely was the artificial sweetener group to be drinking energy drinks? What impact does that have on sleep and neurological aging? What other health focused choices are likely being made by the people making the considerable effort to avoid artificial sweeteners? How do those choices affect them positively. None of this is to knock the researchers, of course. it's a difficult question to design and conduct a study for.

Reply Like

Avatar of Arnold
Arnold

☝️ ☮️ 🫶

46,993 messages 30,674 likes

IDK bro, the article was written by Matt Weik.

Reply Like

N
NextThursday

New Member

8 messages 6 likes

Gotcha. I was moreso asking rhetorically to illustrate some of the questions you would have to answer about the confounding variables before you can draw any solid conclusions from that data.

Thank you for sharing the article 👍

Reply Like

M
McPriimate

Active Member

969 messages 1,255 likes

Bit of this, bit of that. The 62% (by my read anyway) was that the 1.6 years aging happened from a 62% faster decline than the non-sweetener folks (so like a year decline vs 1.6 years - making those number up but the rate is what was 62% great not the absolute number of years).

The confound with these types of studies is typically also that a portion of the population has a shit diet/lifestyle and drinks diet soda alongside it to try to compensate (good on them I suppose). It does affect things like gut microbiome composition and to a lesser extent insulin secretion in the cephalic phase (the insulin you get from something tasting sweet rather than from signals from sugar in your diet/blood). So, lots of confounds but still some statistically significant if pretty minor effects even after controlling for what they can (diet, exercise, etc. - but numerical controlling only goes so far)

Not medical advice, but my overall take is that there isn’t a smoking gun here and if you have your other shit sorted some Diet Coke is juuuuuust fine. As long as your not ordering it with your big boy burger and large ass fries

But it could be that all that diet soda I drink is impairing my cognitive abilities, so caveat emptor [emoji23]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Reply Like

N
NextThursday

New Member

8 messages 6 likes

That makes sense, they’re aging 1.6 years to every year the other group ages. The numbers work like that. Good call.

Reply Like

m
macromaster

New Member

21 messages 9 likes

These observational studies always ignore that people drink diet soda with garbage.

Reply 1 like

Avatar of Meetketchup
Meetketchup

Board Rep

14,991 messages 41,345 likes

Observational study - pointless

Need controlled and randomized.

Reply Like

Avatar of Vexor
Vexor

Board Rep

107 messages 49 likes

Agree, the 62% is a rate difference, not years lost, and that gets mixed up a lot. The confounds are the big caveat, since controlling for diet only goes so far. Diet Coke with a decent lifestyle seems fine to me too, haha.

Reply Like

M
McPriimate

Active Member

969 messages 1,255 likes

All in, I’m betting it’s easier on the body and mind than, say, tren 🤷🏼‍♂️😂 (I know that’s not the comparison - just a joke y’all)

For real though, prolly even more benign than the modest, very well controlled/monitored cycle I’m on now. Guessing it’s just noise compared to the big neuro/longevity/health levers most people don’t think too hard on. Sleep, overall diet, alcohol/weed/other use, exercise (and, although I hate to say it, supraphysiologic hormones are prolly in this bucket)

I like to live on the edge - I have a long drive today and I’m taking a Diet Coke with me and I’m even gonna speed (although not more than 9 mph over or you’ll get a ticket in these parts) 😱😂

Reply Like

Anabolic Steroid Forums

This will close in 0 seconds