Sorry, stevia: Artificial sweeteners get more bad PR

This leaves us with more questions than answers. It compiled data from multiple studies, following the rigorous Cochrane review methodology. The results? A mixed bag. Some small studies hinted at potential benefits of NSSs on BMI and fasting blood glucose in adults, but the evidence was of very low to low certainty. It seems that lower doses of NSSs might be associated with less weight gain than higher doses. Interestingly, for kids, NSS intake compared to sugar resulted in a smaller increase in BMI z-score, according to moderate certainty evidence. However, for most other health outcomes, there were no significant differences detected between NSS users and non-users. A major caveat is that many of the included studies had few participants, were short-term, and had methodological limitations. So I'd say this is far from definitive.

>Unlike sugar, sugar substitutes have no nutritional value, said Francesco Branca, WHO director for nutrition and food safety.

What an unhinged statement. Yes, we all know that SOME sugar is needed to stay alive, but added sugar in a diet is completely useless. This statement misleads the reader into believing food with pure sugar has a 'nutritional value', which it doesn't. Really confused with the direction WHO is taking on this.