Conner Middelmann Whitney: What About Artificial Sweeteners?

Conner, a nutritionist, has an article up at Psychology Today. She doesn’t have too much heartburn about my allowance of stevia in the Parker paleo diet. For example, she writes:

Stevia, a non-caloric sweetener derived from the stevia rebaudiana plant, is a useful sugar alternative, if you don’t mind its slightly metallic, licorice-like taste. Choose minimally processed stevia (green-leaf liquid and powder) rather than the heavily processed white powder. (Stevia processing involves dozens of steps and lots of non-nutritive chemicals to conver tit form green leaf to white powder.)


So, rather than search for the “perfect” sweetener, a better use of our creative energy might be to figure out how to lower our desire for sweet tastes and seek satisfaction from other flavors.


She favors honey when she uses a sweetener. But many diabetics will have unacceptable blood sugar spikes if they eat too much honey.

Much of her article is about sucralose (Splenda).

Read the whole enchilada.

4 responses to “Conner Middelmann Whitney: What About Artificial Sweeteners?

  1. Hi Steve,
    The Pepino study has been publicised as having implications for Diabetics; however only Insulin Sensitive, > BMI of 40 subjects were tested.

    Insulin Sensitive meant HOMAIR 11 IU are regarded as Borderline.

    I hope that when this study is released from behind the paywall, we are able to see: Doses of Sucralose, Doses of Dextrose, 15 minute graphs of both BG and Insulin for the 5-h modified oral glucose tolerance tests.

  2. Correction:
    Insulin Sensitive meant HOMAIR of <=2.6. The Fasting BGs are not tabulated. If Fasting BGs averaged 5 mmol/L, then there is an inferred Fasting Insulin of 11.7 – a level often regarded as Borderline.

    (Sorry about needing correction!)

  3. frank weir

    Dr. Parker…I’m not a physician but even I can see this may or may not have a real world implication given they were measuring after ingesting a glucose tolerance test solution, not everday eating. Also, might this response vary by one’s metabolic health, beta cell function, weight, exercise patterns and practices and so forth? Seems presumptuous for this lady to condemn sucralose on the basis of this one study. It may not be possible to replicate it yet she’s obviously made up her mind. Is there a conflict here? Is she benefitting somehow by condemning sucralose? Does she use Stevia in the diet book she is selling? Something’s wrong here yet many readers will run with this. Best to be skeptical and do one’s own blood testing after using Splenda and then with Stevia. Any difference? How does your own body react under everyday conditions? That’s what matters.