Two things can be true at the same time. Sugar substitutes can be bad for you and still be less bad for you than the equivalent sugar.

It's been shown over and over again that sugar consumption significantly increases obesity, metabolic syndrome, cancer, strokes, cardiovascular disease, chronic inflammation, high blood pressure, bad cholesterol, and probably more things that I'm forgetting. Natural sugar advocates absolutely love to ignore and forget this.

Anything talking about the harms of sugar substitutes needs to always be in relation to the harm definitively known to be caused by equivalent sugar intake. This article does not do that. It only pretends to in a very misleading way.

> In some randomised controlled trials (typically lasting 4-12 weeks) substituting other sweeteners for sugars did admittedly result in lower weight gain. But a number of large, long-term observational studies have found the opposite: people with higher consumption of sugar substitutes—some of whom may be using these to replace sugar in their diets—end up putting on more weight than those who consume the least.

These two statements are orthogonal to each other but they're misleadingly positioned to trick you into thinking otherwise.

Claim A: People who consume sugar substitutes instead of sugar gained less weight than the people who consumed equivalent sugar.

Claim B: People who consume more sugar substitutes in general, with zero relation to equivalent sugar replacement, had more problems than people who consumed less sugar substitutes. But this says absolutely nothing about what health problems would occur if those people had instead consumed sugar equivalent to the greater sugar substitute intake.

People who consume more sugar also experience more health problems than people who consume less sugar. The question is whether consuming sugar substitutes is worse than consuming the equivalent sugar, not whether consuming sugar substitutes is worse than consuming no sweetener at all.

Not to mention the problem of lumping all sugar substitutes together as though biochemistry is a function of flavor perception.

All ingredients should be regulated for public health and safety. That means sugar too, but where are all the articles titled "Are sugars healthier than the substitutes? We share some bitter truths"? Eh? Eh?