Latest news with #rebaudiana
Hindustan Times
5 days ago
- Health
- Hindustan Times
Can this popular sugar substitute fight pancreatic cancer? Here's what new study says
A popular sugar substitute found in many kitchens may one day contribute to cancer treatment. A new study from Hiroshima University in Japan has revealed that stevia leaf extract, when fermented with specific bacteria, could help fight pancreatic cancer cells. Research on fermented stevia extract offers hope for pancreatic cancer treatment. (Freepik) Stevia, derived from the plant Stevia rebaudiana, is widely used as a natural sweetener. However, the study published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences on 26 March 2025 focused on what happens when the extract is fermented. Can stevia help fight pancreatic cancer Researchers found that this version of the extract showed strong antioxidant properties and cytotoxic effects against pancreatic cancer cells in lab tests. These findings suggest that fermented stevia extract could be a promising future candidate for cancer therapy. "This study is interesting because it shows that something naturally derived, like stevia, can be modified to potentially stop cancer cells from growing in the lab," said Dr. Paul E. Oberstein, a medical oncologist and assistant director at NYU Langone's Pancreatic Cancer Centre, in an interview with Fox News Digital. Stevia is a natural sweetener.(Shutterstock) However, he clarified that the regular stevia plant itself doesn't impact cancer cells. The fermentation process is key to enhancing its potential, and there's still a lot to learn about how the modified extract might behave in real-world scenarios. "This wasn't tested on humans, so we don't yet know whether it's safe or effective for patients," Oberstein cautioned. "It's exciting from a research perspective, but not something that will change cancer treatment protocols right away." Is it safe for patients? Dr. Kristen Arnold, a surgical oncologist and pancreatic cancer expert at the Orlando Health Cancer Institute, also weighed in. She emphasised how challenging pancreatic cancer is to treat and noted that any encouraging early data is a welcome development. "Pancreatic cancer is incredibly aggressive, and despite our most intensive treatments, outcomes are often poor," she said. "We're constantly exploring better treatment options, and this kind of research gives us hope." While the findings are preliminary, Arnold called the study "exciting" and part of the ongoing process of discovery in cancer research. "This is how we eventually find breakthrough treatments, some ideas may not work out, but others can lead to dramatic improvements in patients' lives." Both doctors emphasised the importance of continued research and clinical trials. For those diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, Arnold recommended discussing trial opportunities with their medical teams, as these studies often guide the future of treatment.
Indianapolis Star
02-08-2025
- Business
- Indianapolis Star
Trump-backed cane sugar Coke tastes different, but health benefits are a myth
Our favorite soda is being made great again. Or is it? Early in my career, I was puzzled when a lab colleague asked me to bring back a few cans of Coke from my trip home to Brazil. I soon learned that sodas in the United States are sweetened with high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) instead of cane sugar, and that many people miss the original flavor of sugar-sweetened versions. What I've learned about sweeteners since then feels especially relevant now, as Coca-Cola's decision to reintroduce cane sugar into at least one of its American-sold products, allegedly prompted by President Donald Trump's encouragement, has reignited discussion over what goes into our sodas. While sucrose, the chemical name for cane sugar, could be the most common sweetener in our kitchens, many other substances also taste sweet to us. These include glucose, fructose and intensely sweet compounds like saccharin (a synthetic sweetener), steviol glycosides (extracted from the leaves of Stevia rebaudiana) and even ultrasweet proteins. One of the most intriguing of those proteins is brazzein, my personal favorite, which was discovered in the West African plant Pentadiplandra brazzeana and is now produced at scale by engineered microbes in large fermentation tanks. Some of these substances are packed with calories, while others are virtually calorie-free. The way our bodies metabolize them varies widely. Coca-Cola's reintroduction of cane sugar in its products line is a big deal, not just because it affects a multibillion dollar market, but also because beverages operate in an intensely competitive market space with razor-thin margins, where even a few extra cents per can carry real weight. Cost, technical advantages and national interests might explain why soda manufacturers switched to corn syrup. The technical advantages to using HFCS versus cane sugar include the level of sweetness. You can pack a lot of sweetness into HFCS because it is more soluble in water than cane sugar, and it is often easier for the industry to manage syrups versus powders. There is also a strategic advantage for the U.S. economy. With the help of tariffs imposed on imported sugar in the late 1970s, adoption of HFCS allowed replacing sugar imports with a U.S.-grown and -produced alternative. This explains why the industry made the switch, but does soda sweetened with HFCS taste the same? And is sugar really any healthier than HFCS? Even though the sweetness level of the final product can be adjusted to be exactly the same, some consumers notice slight differences in taste and mouth feel when HFCS replaces sugar cane in beverages. Some say that the cane sugar version is 'crisper,' or that the HFCS version tastes more 'syrupy,' while others will either not notice the change or quickly get used to it. However, beyond the perception in our mouths, our bodies handle these sugars in different ways. After we swallow products containing sucrose, our body breaks each molecule into one molecule of glucose and one of fructose. Glucose is one of the most important sources of energy for our body, essential for the functioning of our brain, which might explain why we are hardwired to crave sweets so much. Fructose, however, is almost solely metabolized in our livers, and because it isn't as readily consumed as an energy source, it may saturate liver capacities and lead to more fat accumulation. Overconsumption of either of these sugars increases likelihood of obesity and fatty liver disease, ultimately leading to type 2 diabetes and other severe health problems. The bottom line is simple: The potential difference in health impact between cane sugar and HFCS is minor when compared with the well-established risks of excessive consumption of sugar. Both are added sugars that contribute to the growing burden of metabolic disease when consumed in excess. Hopefully, the discussion around corn syrup versus cane sugar won't lead us to lose sight of the importance of reducing overall sugar consumption − perhaps by opting for the diet versions of our favorite sodas, as President Trump has.
