Next Article in Journal
Selection and Use of Wild Lachancea thermotolerans Strains from Rioja AOC with Bioacidificant Capacity as Strategy to Mitigate Climate Change Effects in Wine Industry
Previous Article in Journal
Potential of Different Eighteen Grapevine Genotypes to Produce Wines in a Hot Region: First Insights into Volatile and Sensory Profiles
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Beverages
Volume 11
Issue 3
10.3390/beverages11030069
beverages-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Gain of Body Fat and Intake of Energy in Rats with Low Dose of Caloric and Non-Caloric Sweeteners Used in Reformulation Beverage in Mexico

by
Guadalupe López-Rodríguez
1,*,
Marcos Galván
1,
Oscar Galván-Valencia
1 and
Jocelyn Gómez-Castillo
1,2
1
Nutritional Epidemiology Research Group (CAEPINUT), School of Nutrition, Institute of Health Sciences, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, Pachuca 42000, Hidalgo, Mexico
2
School of Nutrition, University of Football and Sports Science, San Agustín Tlaxiaca 42160, Hidalgo, Mexico
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Beverages 2025, 11(3), 69; https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages11030069
Submission received: 13 March 2025 / Revised: 6 May 2025 / Accepted: 8 May 2025 / Published: 12 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Sensory Analysis of Beverages)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In Mexico and worldwide, the increased prevalence of both weight gain and obesity is associated with the consumption of sugary drinks. Mexico implemented a tax of one peso per liter on sugary drinks in 2014, and in response, the industry reformulated these beverages; however, the health effects are relatively unknown. Male and female Wistar rats consumed caloric sweeteners (CS: dextrose, saccharose, and HFCS at 7%) and non-caloric sweeteners (NCS: sucralose and stevia at 0.3%) for 16 weeks to determine the impact on metabolic and adiposity indicators. The weight, food intake (AIN93M diet), and beverage intake of the rats were recorded weekly. At the end of the treatment, the gonadal (GAT), mesenteric (MAT), and retroperitoneal (RAT) adipose tissue were dissected, and serum metabolic indicators were quantified. No differences were observed in weight gain, but there were higher beverage and energy intake, mainly in female rats. All groups with CS and NCS increased 2.0–2.4 or 1.3–1.9 times their intake of beverages, respectively, compared to the control groups (p < 0.01). With dextrose intake, male rats showed a significantly greater amount (mg/g body weight) of GAT (3.7 ± 0.6 vs. 2.3 ± 0.3), MAT (2.8 ± 0.8 vs. 1.7 ± 0.3), and RAT (4.6 ± 0.6 vs. 2.7 ± 0.2) in the stevia group, p < 0.05. Additionally, male rats in both CS and NCS groups presented elevated triglyceride concentrations (mg/dL), and the dextrose (299.7 ± 62.3) and sucralose (352.4 ± 36.2) groups registered the highest means, compared to the control group (122.3 ± 51.2, p < 0.05). The consumption of CS and NCS of beverages has effects on the volume ingested, as well as metabolic and adiposity indicators; therefore, they should not be considered innocuous.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Obesity stands as a significant public health challenge in Mexico and worldwide, as it is closely associated with the development of dyslipidemias, metabolic syndrome, non-alcoholic liver disease, diabetes, and certain types of cancers [1]. Numerous factors contribute to its etiology in Mexico, with notable emphasis on the consumption of high-sugar and high-saturated-fat foods, coupled with sedentary lifestyles and elevated intake of sugary beverages [2]. Sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) with sucrose, high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), or fruit juice concentrates have been identified as a major factor contributing to the obesity epidemic [3].
In 2022, overweight and obesity affected 37.3% of children and 41% of the adolescents in Mexico [4], and 72.2% of Mexican adults [5]. Mexico had the highest per capita soft drink consumption in 2011, with an average intake of 163 L. Among children and adults, the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages contributes approximately 10% of the total daily energy intake and accounts for 70% of the total added sugars in the diet [4,6]. Studies estimate that between 12% and 19% of deaths among obese adults in Mexico attributed to diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and cancers in 2010 and 2012 were linked to SSB consumption [7,8]. SSB intake in children and adults correlates with weight gain [9], obesity [10], insulin resistance [11], and increases in visceral fat deposits [12]. Given the evidence that the consumption of SSBs is a risk factor for numerous chronic diseases, a tax on these beverages has been implemented in Mexico since 2014 as a public health strategy to reduce the prevalence of unhealthy weight and obesity in the population.
In response to the tax, the beverage industry produced reformulated beverages for children and adults, using non-caloric sweeteners (NCSs), or a mixture of both, in place of only caloric sweeteners (CSs). However, the long-term effects of substances that mimic sweetness without contributing energy, including energy intake, remain ambiguous [13,14]. In humans, the consumption of beverages containing non-caloric sweeteners (NCSs) has been associated with weight reduction [15], with a contradictory effect in glucose metabolism [16]. In rats, NCSs have been associated with alterations in satiety signaling pathways and fatty acid synthesis [17].
Currently, conclusive data regarding the influence of both caloric sweeteners and NCSs used in reformulation of beverage in Mexico and their effect in energy intake regulation, body fat accumulation, and metabolic and adiposity indicators are lacking. Thus, evaluating the chronic effects of these sweeteners on energy intake, body composition, and metabolic and adiposity indicators in animal models is necessary to better understand their potential impact on human health.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Animals and Diets

The project procedures were approved by the Institutional Ethical Committee for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (CICUAL) at the Autonomous University of the State of Hidalgo (UAEH), code 01/2017, approved 01/13/2017. The study included 84 Wistar Han rats (42 males and 42 females) weighing between 40 and 50 g. Throughout the 17-week experiment, the rats were housed in the UAEH vivarium. They were fed the AIN-93M diet from the American Institute of Nutrition [18], providing an energy contribution of 3.77 Kcal/g. The rats were housed individually in polycarbonate cages with wood-shaving bedding (Crigamex®), under controlled conditions of temperature (22 ± 2 °C), humidity (40–70%), and a 12/12-h light/dark cycle. During the adaptation period, all animals had ad libitum access to water for one week (week 1 of the experiment).
After adaptation, the rats were divided into 6 groups, each consisting of 7 females or males randomly selected. The control groups of females and males consumed ad libitum water for 16 weeks. Three groups received solutions containing 7% CS (0.28 Kcal/mL): (1) sucrose from sugar cane, (2) anhydrous dextrose, and (3) high-fructose corn syrup (high-fructose 55, MILLIKAN®, Estado de México, Mexico). The remaining 2 groups ingested NCS at 0.3% dissolved in water: (4) steviol glycosides solution (2.5 g/100 g, Svetia®, Ciudad de México, Mexico) and (5) sucralose (1.2 g/100 g, Splenda®, Indianapolis, IN, USA).

Sweeteners Selection

In a previous study, caloric and non-caloric sweeteners were identified in the ingredients of 621 non-alcoholic beverages available on the Mexican market in the year 2020 [19], and sucrose (82.9%), HFCS (9.2%) and dextrose (0.97%) were the primary caloric sweeteners used. Sucralose (28.6% and 18.4%) and stevia (19.6% and 14.0%) were the main non-caloric sweeteners (NCSs) found in flavored waters and juices or nectars, respectively. Additionally, sucralose was used as a sweetener in carbonated beverages (19%), plant-based drinks (35.1%), isotonic or energy drinks (26.6%), and dairy beverages (23.5%) [20]. Stevia was selected because organic NCSs are preferred by consumers, and sucralose was the ENC used in many beverage types in Mexico.
It has been reported that 25 mg of steviol glycosides or 12 mg of sucralose (equivalent to 1 g of product) provides a sweetness intensity comparable to that of 8 g of sucrose. If these non-caloric sweeteners (NCSs) were added to a cup of water (~250 mL) for human consumption, the resulting concentrations would be approximately 10 and 4.8 mg/100 mL, respectively, compared to 7.5 and 3.6 mg/100 mL tested in this study. Therefore, the doses used in this experimental model are considered low, as commercially available beverages for adults, as well as juices or nectars for children, typically contain between 10 and 20 mg/100 g of sucralose, or a mixture of sucrose (7.0–8.0 g/100 mL) with 3.4 mg/100 mL of stevia [21].

2.2. Baseline and Consecutive Measurements

At the experiment’s onset, a total of 6 male and 6 female Wistar rats (one from each group) were sacrificed to obtain serum for baseline metabolic measurements; these animals had not consumed CS or NCS. For 16 weeks, 6 female and 6 male rats from each group continued in the experiment. At the end of the 16-week treatment period, all animals were sacrificed to evaluate cumulative effects.

2.3. Weekly Weight and Caloric Intake Records

Individual body weights of the rats were recorded every seven days from the project’s commencement until its conclusion; a Triple beam 700/800 series Ohaus® scale (Parsippany, NJ, USA) with an accuracy of 0.1 g was utilized for this purpose. Continuous measurements of feed consumption (3 times per week) were recorded using a Tanita KD-160® scale (Itabashi-Ku, Tokyo, Japan). The volume of ingested solutions was calculated by measuring the liquid volume in the drinking troughs daily with a 500 mL Kimax® (Vineland, NJ, USA) measuring cylinder.

2.4. Sacrifice and Blood Collection

At the end of the 16-week treatment period, sweetened beverage consumption was discontinued, and all animals were provided with only water for 24 h. Prior to sacrifice, the rats were anesthetized with isoflurane inhalation (Pisa®, Jalisco, Mexico) following an 8-hour fasting period. The animals were euthanized by decapitation, and blood was collected from the carotid artery and jugular vein using BD Vacutainer® tubes, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA (plastic, with clot activator and silicone coating). Within the following 60 min, blood was centrifuged at 5000 rpm for 10 min to obtain serum, which was then frozen at −30 °C for a maximum of 10 days.

2.5. Dissection of Adipose Tissue

After sacrifice and blood extraction, rats were surgically opened in the middle abdominal region to obtain, via dissection, the mesenteric adipose tissue (MAT), located around of the small and large intestinal mesentery, right mesocolon, transverse mesocolon, small intestinal mesentery, mesosigmoid, and mesorectum; the gonadal adipose tissue (GAT), located over the reproductive organs of females (ovaries and uterus) and males (surface of the testes and epididymis); and retroperitoneal adipose tissue (RAT), located in the posterior parietal peritoneum along the dorsal abdominal wall. Each adipose tissue was weighed separately using an Ohaus model Adventurer Pro® analytical scale (Parsippany, NJ, USA) with an accuracy of 0.01 g.

2.6. Measurement of Biochemical Indicators

Serum was used for analytical determinations of glucose, total cholesterol (TC), HDL cholesterol (high-density lipoprotein), triglycerides (TGs), leptin, adiponectin, and insulin levels using enzymatic kits from Wiener Lab® (Ciudad de México, Mexico) and ELISA kits from Millipore® (Darmstadt, Germany), following the manufacturer’s protocols. The measurements were performed using the Biotek PowerWave XS® (Winooski, VT, USA) microplate reader.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

The statistical program IBM® SPSS® (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 25.0 for Windows® was used for the analysis of results. The variables were described as means ± standard deviation (SD), normal distribution, and the homogeneity of variances were assessed to determine appropriate statistical test. Student’s t-test or Mann–Whitney U test was used to compare two groups, while one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post-test or Dunnet’s T-3 or Kruskal–Wallis test was employed for cross-sectional comparisons between different diets and treatment groups. A significant level of p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

3. Results

3.1. Drink Intake and Weight Gain of Wistar Rats

Animals with caloric and non-caloric sweeteners consumed significantly more beverages compared to the control group (p < 0.05), with a preference for beverages with caloric sweeteners (Table 1). In relation to the control group, male rats consumed 2.1, 2.0, and 2.1 times more beverage with sucrose, HFCS, and dextrose, respectively, and only 1.3 and 1.5 times more beverage with sucralose and stevia (p < 0.01). Females consumed 2.25, 2.3, and 2.45 times more beverage with sucrose, HFCS, and dextrose, respectively, and only 1.9 and 1.8 times more beverage with sucralose and stevia (p < 0.01). Female rats showed higher consumption of sweetened beverages compared to males (p < 0.05).
At the beginning of the study, the average weight of the animals was 69.1 ± 8.3 g, without differences between sexes and study groups. There were no differences in weight gain between male and female rats at the end of the 16 weeks of treatment with caloric and non-caloric sweeteners. At the end of the study, the male rats recorded a weight of 430.5 ± 51.8 g, and the female rats recorded 245.2 ± 22.1 g, with no differences between the experimental groups.

3.2. Energy Intake in Wistar Rats

Figure 1 presents the mean ± SD of energy intake from food and drink (Kcal/week) in male and female rats. In males, energy intakes per week differed among the experimental groups, with higher intakes observed at weeks 8 and 12 in the sucrose, dextrose, and stevia groups compared to the control group (p < 0.05). At the average of the 16 weeks of treatment (W16), the stevia group of males consumed more energy (588.2 ± 4.4 Kcal) than the control group (547.2 ± 11.2 Kcal), p < 0.05.
In relation to the control, the female rats of the groups with caloric sweeteners sucralose, HFCS, and dextrose registered a higher energy intake from week 4 of treatment (p < 0.05). At W16, the female control and sucralose group also recorded differences in energy intake (375.2 ± 12.5 vs. 406.2 ± 7.7 Kcal, respectively, p < 0.05). In contrast to observations in male rats, females in the stevia group did not present differences in energy intake compared to the control group.
The amount of energy consumed from the beverage was similar between males and females in the sucrose (110.7 ± 5.7 vs. 98.5 ± 9.8 Kcal/week, p = 0.53), dextrose (111.4 ± 1.5 vs.111.5 ± 9.2 Kcal/week, p = 0.99), and HFCS (75.8 ± 12.5 vs. 83.7 ± 2.3, p = 0.96) groups, (Figure 1). Although, the proportion of energy intake from beverages with caloric sweeteners was higher (p < 0.01) in females compared to males for the sucrose (23.0% vs. 18.9%), dextrose (24.8% vs. 19.9%), and HFCS (19.1% vs. 13.4%) groups (Figure 1).

3.3. Adipose Tissue in Wistar Rats

The amounts of GAT, MAT, and RAT in male and female Wistar rats treated with caloric and non-caloric sweeteners for 16 weeks are described in Table 2. Higher GAT (3.7 ± 0.61 mg/g wt) and MAT (2.8 ± 0.80 mg/g wt) were present in male rats of the dextrose group compared to the control group (TAG, 2.3 ± 0.33; and MAT, 1.7 ± 0.33 mg/g wt), p < 0.05. Male rats in the stevia group presented a higher amount of RAT (4.6 ± 0.64 mg/g wt) compared to the control group (2.7 ± 0.19 mg/g wt), p < 0.05. In males, the total amount (GAT + MAT + RAT) of adipose tissue was higher in the dextrose and stevia group.
In female rats, a higher amount of TAG was identified in the HFCS and dextrose group relative to the control group (4.7 ± 0.81, 4.1 ± 0.24 vs. 2.2 ± 0.75 mg/g wt, respectively, p < 0.05). In TAM and TAR, no differences were found in any of the study groups. The total amount of adipose tissue was higher in the HFCS and dextrose group, with no significant differences between the groups with non-caloric sweeteners.

3.4. Biochemical and Adiposity Indicators

At the beginning of the experiment, the average glucose concentration in all Wistar rats (baseline) was 66.1 ± 18 mg/dL, with TG levels at 108.1 ± 35.9 mg/dL, TC at 112.6 ± 18.2 mg/dL, and HDL at 42.6 ± 8.9 mg/dL. Insulin concentration at baseline was 0.64 ± 0.19 ng/mL, and adiponectin levels were 0.45 ± 0.13 ng/dL, with no differences observed between males and females (Table 3).
Table 3 describes the averages ± SD of metabolic and adiposity indicators in male and female Wistar rats. At the end of treatment in males, all study groups showed higher concentrations of TG compared to the control group (p < 0.05). Additionally, the stevia group exhibited a higher concentration of HDL cholesterol compared to the control group (39.3 ± 8.0 vs. 28.7 ± 3.9 mg/dL, p < 0.05).
No differences were found in glucose, TC, insulin, leptin, and adiponectin markers in any study groups compared to the control group. However, insulin was lower in males of the JAMF group in relation to the glucose and sucralose groups (Table 3).
In female rats of the HFCS group, a higher serum glucose concentration was recorded compared to the control group (90.4 ± 11.8 vs. 65.1 ± 10.5, p < 0.05). Moreover, rats treated with sucrose, dextrose, and sucralose showed a higher TG concentration compared to the control group (p < 0.05). No significant differences were observed in TC, HDL, insulin, leptin, and adiponectin concentrations between the control group and the other treatments. However, significant differences in insulin concentrations were recorded between females with dextrose compared to the sucralose group (Table 3).

4. Discussion

The reformulation of foods and beverages began in 1980 with the goal of reducing energy density by replacing sugars or fats with alternative ingredients. These novel ingredients may introduce allergens or pose new physical, chemical, or biological risks that were not present in the original formulation [22]. The incorporation of sweeteners in beverages reduces the energy and sugar content while preserving the sweet taste, because consumer demand is higher for beverages with a high sweetness intensity [23].
Both humans [24] and rodents [25] exhibit a preference for the sweet taste due to the pleasurable sensations associated with their consumption. The findings of this study suggest that the increased consumption of sweetened beverages is independent of their energy content. However, it was observed that consumption was higher with caloric sweeteners, which may be attributed to a greater reward response associated with the learned satiating capacity of calorically sweetened foods, influenced in part by the viscosity of energy drinks [26,27]. In this study, female rats demonstrated a stronger preference for sweet beverages, possibly due to gonadal sex hormones [28,29] and a heightened sensitivity to sweet taste [30].
Despite the increased consumption of beverages with caloric sweeteners, no significant differences in weight gain were observed after 16 weeks of treatment in both female and male rats. These results are aligned with previous studies conducted on Wistar rats over shorter durations, which used sucrose (35%) and high fructose (15%) in the animals’ beverages [31,32]. Conversely, some reports indicate weight gain in female and male BALB mice after consuming solutions containing sucrose (10%) or 0.25% sucralose for 6 weeks, while no changes were observed in those consuming steviol [33]. Similarly, Wistar rats consuming steviol and fructose did not exhibit weight changes [34]. In this study, the lack of association between increased consumption of caloric sweetened beverages and changes in body weight in the tested rats may be attributed to adjustments in total energy intake or changes in body composition, potentially involving an increase in adipose tissue.
Results regarding energy intake from food and sweetened solutions indicate that male rats exhibit greater adjustments in energy intake from food over the long term in response to the consumption of sweetened beverages (Table 1 and Figure 1). In contrast, females in the caloric-sweetener group and the sucralose group did not adjust total energy intake (food and beverage), which was associated with higher energy intake from the beverage in the caloric-sweetener group. Studies in humans and rats have reported sex-based differences [35,36] associated with the regulation of energy intake from sweetened beverages in the short [37] and medium term [38]. Male rats appear to have a greater capacity to regulate energy intake compared to females, although the underlying mechanisms for these differences remain unclear.
Consumption of non-caloric sweeteners was associated with higher energy intake in male rats in the stevia group and in females in the sucralose group compared to the control group, suggesting that these non-caloric sweeteners have varying effects on energy intake. This difference may be due to the inconsistent coupling between sweet taste and caloric content [39] which can lead to a compensatory response in energy intake [40]. Despite the higher energy intake observed in female rats, no differences in weight gain were noted. However, both males and females exhibited differences in the amount of adipose tissue. With the consumption of the sweetened beverage, other nutrients, mainly lipids and proteins, were displaced from the diet, potentially explaining why body weight remained stable but adipose tissue increased. A study in men revealed that intake of drinks containing non-caloric sweeteners (sodium cyclamate, acesulfame K, aspartame, and sodium saccharin) increased neural activity in regions associated with reward, while sucrose and water primarily affected insula activation [41].
This study also identified sex-specific differences in the total amount of adipose tissue and the type of sweetener consumed. Consumption of dextrose and stevia in males, and dextrose and HFCS in females, was associated with a greater amount of adipose tissue, primarily in gonadal tissue. Increased accumulation of adipose tissue has been reported in rodents (Wistar rat and CD1 mice) of both sexes, associated with the consumption of caloric sweeteners such as dextrose [42,43] as well as non-caloric sweeteners, such as sucralose in females and stevia in male mice (CD1 and C57BL) [44,45], consistent with the findings of this study.
Furthermore, an increase in serum insulin levels of male and female Wistar rats was observed with the intake of dextrose and sucralose. Chronic use of non-caloric sweeteners like sucralose has been shown to increase plasma levels of glucose insulinotropic peptide (GIP) and insulin in obese patients, indicating a potential development of insulin resistance [46]. The observed increase in HDL levels in male rats consuming stevia aligns with previous reports in albino rats with hyperlipidemia [47], suggesting a beneficial effect on blood lipids through regulation of lecithin cholesterol acyl transferase (LCAT) activity [48,49].
This study has certain limitations. First, although animal models are valuable for approximating biological responses to the intake of caloric and non-caloric sweeteners, the findings cannot be directly extrapolated to humans. Second, not all sweeteners used in the formulation of beverages in Mexico were evaluated, nor were combinations of these compounds considered. Therefore, the results presented here reflect only the biological response of Wistar rats to the independent consumption of CS and NCS.

5. Conclusions

The consumption of both caloric and non-caloric sweeteners from early ages of life was linked to elevated energy intake, particularly in female rats. Beverages containing HFCS and dextrose were associated with increased energy intake and higher amounts of gonadal adipose tissue in female rats. In male rats, consumption of stevia beverages led to increased energy intake, while both stevia and dextrose were higher total adipose tissue. These findings highlight the complex relationship between sweetener consumption, energy regulation, and adipose tissue deposition, which may vary based on sex and sweetener type.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.L.-R. and M.G.; methodology, G.L.-R. and J.G.-C.; validation, G.L.-R. and J.G.-C.; formal analysis, G.L.-R. and O.G.-V.; investigation G.L.-R., M.G. and O.G.-V.; data curation, G.L.-R. and J.G.-C.; writing—original draft preparation, G.L.-R.; writing—review and editing, G.L.-R., M.G. and O.G.-V. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The animal study protocol was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals (CICUAL) at the Autonomous University of the State of Hidalgo (code, 01/2017; approved on 13 January 2017).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

NCSsNon-caloric sweeteners
CSsCaloric sweeteners
GATGonadal adipose tissue
MATMesenteric adipose tissue
HDLHigh-density lipoprotein
ANOVAAnalysis of variance
HFCSHigh-fructose corn syrup
TCTotal cholesterol
TGTriglycerides

References

  1. Huang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Chen, B.; Li, J.; Yuan, X.; Li, J.; Wang, W.; Dai, T.; Chen, H.; Wang, Y.; et al. Dietary sugar consumption and health: Umbrella review. BMJ 2023, 381, e071609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Perez-Herrera, A.; Cruz-Lopez, M. Childhood obesity: Current situation in Mexico. Nutr. Hosp. 2019, 36, 463–469. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  3. Stanhope, K.L. Sugar consumption, metabolic disease and obesity: The state of the controversy. Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 2016, 53, 52–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Shamah-Levy, T.; Gaona-Pineda, E.B.; Rodriguez-Ramirez, S.; Morales-Ruan, C.; Cuevas-Nasu, L.; Mendez-Gomez-Humaran, I.; Valenzuela-Bravo, D.G.; Avila-Arcos, M.A. Sobrepeso, obesidad y consumo de azúcares en población escolar y adolescente de México. Ensanut 2020–2022. Salud Publica Mex. 2023, 65, s570–s580. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Campos-Nonato, I.; Galvan-Valencia, O.; Hernandez-Barrera, L.; Oviedo-Solis, C.; Barquera, S. Prevalencia de obesidad y factores de riesgo asociados en adultos mexicanos: Resultados de la Ensanut 2022. Salud Publica Mex. 2023, 65, s238–s247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sanchez-Pimienta, T.G.; Batis, C.; Lutter, C.K.; Rivera, J.A. Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Are the Main Sources of Added Sugar Intake in the Mexican Population. J. Nutr. 2016, 146, 1888S–1896S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Singh, G.M.; Micha, R.; Khatibzadeh, S.; Lim, S.; Ezzati, M.; Mozaffarian, D.; Global Burden of Diseases Nutrition; Chronic Diseases Expert Group (NutriCoDE). Estimated Global, Regional, and National Disease Burdens Related to Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption in 2010. Circulation 2015, 132, 639–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Braverman-Bronstein, A.; Camacho-Garcia-Formenti, D.; Zepeda-Tello, R.; Cudhea, F.; Singh, G.M.; Mozaffarian, D.; Barrientos-Gutierrez, T. Mortality attributable to sugar sweetened beverages consumption in Mexico: An update. Int. J. Obes. 2020, 44, 1341–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Nguyen, M.; Jarvis, S.E.; Tinajero, M.G.; Yu, J.; Chiavaroli, L.; Mejia, S.B.; Khan, T.A.; Tobias, D.K.; Willett, W.C.; Hu, F.B.; et al. Sugar-sweetened beverage consumption and weight gain in children and adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies and randomized controlled trials. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2023, 117, 160–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Malik, V.S.; Hu, F.B. The role of sugar-sweetened beverages in the global epidemics of obesity and chronic diseases. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 2022, 18, 205–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Golabek, K.D.; Regulska-Ilow, B. Dietary support in insulin resistance: An overview of current scientific reports. Adv. Clin. Exp. Med. 2019, 28, 1577–1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Shearrer, G.E.; Daniels, M.J.; Toledo-Corral, C.M.; Weigensberg, M.J.; Spruijt-Metz, D.; Davis, J.N. Associations among sugar sweetened beverage intake, visceral fat, and cortisol awakening response in minority youth. Physiol. Behav. 2016, 167, 188–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Azad, M.B.; Abou-Setta, A.M.; Chauhan, B.F.; Rabbani, R.; Lys, J.; Copstein, L.; Mann, A.; Jeyaraman, M.M.; Reid, A.E.; Fiander, M.; et al. Nonnutritive sweeteners and cardiometabolic health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and prospective cohort studies. CMAJ 2017, 189, E929–E939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Laviada-Molina, H.; Molina-Segui, F.; Perez-Gaxiola, G.; Cuello-Garcia, C.; Arjona-Villicana, R.; Espinosa-Marron, A.; Martinez-Portilla, R.J. Effects of nonnutritive sweeteners on body weight and BMI in diverse clinical contexts: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2020, 21, e13020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Tobiassen, P.A.; Koster-Rasmussen, R. Substitution of sugar-sweetened beverages with non-caloric alternatives and weight change: A systematic review of randomized trials and meta-analysis. Obes. Rev. 2024, 25, e13652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ahmad, S.Y.; Friel, J.K.; MacKay, D.S. The effect of the artificial sweeteners on glucose metabolism in healthy adults: A randomized, double-blinded, crossover clinical trial. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2020, 45, 606–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tovar, A.P.; Navalta, J.W.; Kruskall, L.J.; Young, J.C. The effect of moderate consumption of non-nutritive sweeteners on glucose tolerance and body composition in rats. Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab. 2017, 42, 1225–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Reeves, P.G.; Nielsen, F.H.; Fahey, G.C., Jr. AIN-93 purified diets for laboratory rodents: Final report of the American Institute of Nutrition ad hoc writing committee on the reformulation of the AIN-76A rodent diet. J. Nutr. 1993, 123, 1939–1951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ramirez-Ramirez, C.; Mendoza-Garcia, G.; Lopez-Rodriguez, G.; Hernandez-Cabrera, J.; Olivo-Ramirez, D.; Galvan, M. Association of sweetened beverage consumption with abdominal obesity and fasting glycemia in Mexican. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2023, 78 (Suppl. S3), 134. [Google Scholar]
  20. Galván, M.; (Universidad Autónoma del Estado de Hidalgo, Pachuca de Soto Hidalgo, México); Ramírez-Ramírez, C.; (Universidad Autónoma del estado de Hidalgo, Pachuca de Soto Hidalgo, México). Analysis of the type and content of caloric and non-caloric sweeteners in 621 non-alcoholic beverages available on the Mexican market before and after front-of-package labeling: 2020–2022. 2025; Unpublished work. [Google Scholar]
  21. PROFECO. Jugos y bebidas saborizadas en presentaciones pequeñas dirigidos a niñas y niños. Rev. Del Consum. 2025, 578, 22–38. [Google Scholar]
  22. WHO. Reformulation of Food and Beverage Products for Healthier Diets: Policy Brief; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  23. Jensen, J.D.; Mielby, L.A.; Kidmose, U. Consumer preferences for attributes in sweet beverages and market impacts of beverage innovation. Appetite 2024, 197, 107329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Schiffman, S.S.; Gatlin, C.A. Sweeteners: State of knowledge review. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 1993, 17, 313–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Berridge, K.C. Modulation of taste affect by hunger, caloric satiety, and sensory-specific satiety in the rat. Appetite 1991, 16, 103–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Delogu, F.; Huddas, C.; Steven, K.; Hachem, S.; Lodhia, L.; Fernandez, R.; Logerstedt, M. A Dissociation Between Recognition and Hedonic Value in Caloric and Non-caloric Carbonated Soft Drinks. Front. Psychol. 2016, 7, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Chen, H.H.; Chu, C.H.; Wen, S.W.; Lai, C.C.; Cheng, P.W.; Tseng, C.J. Excessive Fructose Intake Impairs Baroreflex Sensitivity and Led to Elevated Blood Pressure in Rats. Nutrients 2019, 11, 2851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Gentry, R.T.; Wade, G.N. Sex differences in sensitivity of food intake, body weight, and running-wheel activity to ovarian steroids in rats. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 1976, 90, 747–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Sclafani, A.; Hertwig, H.; Vigorito, M.; Feigin, M.B. Sex differences in polysaccharide and sugar preferences in rats. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 1987, 11, 241–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Michon, C.; O’sullivan, M.; Delahunty, C.; Kerry, J. The investigation of gender-related sensitivity differences in food perception. J. Sens. Stud. 2009, 24, 922–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Martínez, C.; González, E.; Garc, R.S.; Salas, G.; Constantino-Casas, F.; Macías, L.; Gracia, I.; Tovar, C.; Durán-de-Bazúa, C. Effects on body mass of laboratory rats after ingestion of drinking water with sucrose, fructose, aspartame, and sucralose additives. Open Obes. J. 2010, 2, 116–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Burgeiro, A.; Cerqueira, M.G.; Varela-Rodriguez, B.M.; Nunes, S.; Neto, P.; Pereira, F.C.; Reis, F.; Carvalho, E. Glucose and Lipid Dysmetabolism in a Rat Model of Prediabetes Induced by a High-Sucrose Diet. Nutrients 2017, 9, 638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Barrios-Correa, A.A.; Estrada, J.A.; Martel, C.; Olivier, M.; Lopez-Santiago, R.; Contreras, I. Chronic Intake of Commercial Sweeteners Induces Changes in Feeding Behavior and Signaling Pathways Related to the Control of Appetite in BALB/c Mice. Biomed. Res. Int. 2018, 2018, 3628121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Sánchez-Tapia, M.; Martínez-Medina, J.; Tovar, A.R.; Torres, N. Natural and artificial sweeteners and high fat diet modify differential taste receptors, insulin, and TLR4-mediated inflammatory pathways in adipose tissues of rats. Nutrients 2019, 11, 880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Hamilton, L.W.; Timmons, C.R. Sex differences in response to taste and postingestive consequences of sugar solutions. Physiol. Behav. 1976, 17, 221–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Mendoza-Pérez, S.; García-Gómez, R.S.; Ordaz-Nava, G.; Gracia-Mora, M.I.; Macías-Rosales, L.; Morales-Rico, H.; Salas-Garrido, G.; Pérez-Armendáriz, E.M.; Bustamante-García, R.; Durán-Domínguez-de-Bazúa, M.D.C. Consumption of sweeteners at different stages of life: Effects on body mass, food and drink intake in male and female Wistar rats. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 72, 935–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ranawana, D.; Henry, C. Are caloric beverages compensated for in the short-term by young adults? An investigation with particular focus on gender differences. Appetite 2010, 55, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Davy, B.M.; Van Walleghen, E.L.; Orr, J.S. Sex differences in acute energy intake regulation. Appetite 2007, 49, 141–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mattes, R.D.; Popkin, B.M. Nonnutritive sweetener consumption in humans: Effects on appetite and food intake and their putative mechanisms. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 2009, 89, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yang, Q. Gain weight by “going diet?” Artificial sweeteners and the neurobiology of sugar cravings: Neuroscience 2010. Yale J. Biol. Med. 2010, 83, 101. [Google Scholar]
  41. Smeets, P.A.; Weijzen, P.; de Graaf, C.; Viergever, M.A. Consumption of caloric and non-caloric versions of a soft drink differentially affects brain activation during tasting. Neuroimage 2011, 54, 1367–1374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Jacquillet, G.; Debnam, E.S.; Unwin, R.J.; Marks, J. Acute saccharin infusion has no effect on renal glucose handling in normal rats in vivo. Physiol. Rep. 2018, 6, e13804. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Bian, X.; Chi, L.; Gao, B.; Tu, P.; Ru, H.; Lu, K. The artificial sweetener acesulfame potassium affects the gut microbiome and body weight gain in CD-1 mice. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0178426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Rosales-Gómez, C.A.; Martínez-Carrillo, B.E.; Reséndiz-Albor, A.A.; Ramírez-Durán, N.; Valdés-Ramos, R.; Mondragón-Velásquez, T.; Escoto-Herrera, J.A. Chronic consumption of sweeteners and its effect on glycaemia, cytokines, hormones, and lymphocytes of GALT in CD1 mice. BioMed Res. Int. 2018, 2018, 1345282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Kim, E.; Lim, S.M.; Kim, M.S.; Yoo, S.H.; Kim, Y. Phyllodulcin, a Natural Sweetener, Regulates Obesity-Related Metabolic Changes and Fat Browning-Related Genes of Subcutaneous White Adipose Tissue in High-Fat Diet-Induced Obese Mice. Nutrients 2017, 9, 1049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Pepino, M.Y.; Tiemann, C.D.; Patterson, B.W.; Wice, B.M.; Klein, S. Sucralose affects glycemic and hormonal responses to an oral glucose load. Diabetes Care 2013, 36, 2530–2535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Ahmad, U.; Ahmad, R.S.; Arshad, M.S.; Mushtaq, Z.; Hussain, S.M.; Hameed, A. Antihyperlipidemic efficacy of aqueous extract of Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni in albino rats. Lipids Health Dis. 2018, 17, 175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Elnaga, N.A.; Massoud, M.I.; Yousef, M.; Mohamed, H.H. Effect of stevia sweetener consumption as non-caloric sweetening on body weight gain and biochemical’s parameters in overweight female rats. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2016, 61, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Shukla, R.; Gupta, S.; Gambhir, J.K.; Prabhu, K.M.; Murthy, P.S. Antioxidant effect of aqueous extract of the bark of Ficus bengalensis in hypercholesterolaemic rabbits. J. Ethnopharmacol. 2004, 92, 47–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Beverages 11 00069 g001
Figure 1. Average energy intake in Wistar rats with caloric and non-caloric sweeteners during 16 weeks of treatment. Co = control group, St = stevia, Su = sucralose, De = dextrose, HF = high-fructose corn syrup 55, and Sa = sucrose. M = male and F = female. The black bars represent the energy of the food, and the gray bars represent the beverages drink. Different letters indicate significant differences between groups of males or females with their control, p < 0.05.
Figure 1. Average energy intake in Wistar rats with caloric and non-caloric sweeteners during 16 weeks of treatment. Co = control group, St = stevia, Su = sucralose, De = dextrose, HF = high-fructose corn syrup 55, and Sa = sucrose. M = male and F = female. The black bars represent the energy of the food, and the gray bars represent the beverages drink. Different letters indicate significant differences between groups of males or females with their control, p < 0.05.
Beverages 11 00069 g001
Table 1. Total intake of water or beverages (mL) with caloric and no caloric sweeteners in Wistar rats.
Table 1. Total intake of water or beverages (mL) with caloric and no caloric sweeteners in Wistar rats.
Males
WeekSucroseHFCSDextroseSucraloseSteviaControl
1307.3 ± 9.5 bc290.8 ± 2.4 b331.3 ± 10.2 bd203.2 ± 10.0 bd272.0 ± 32.9 b170.7 ± 6.9 ad
4423.9 ± 25.6 bc432.5 ± 14.8 b416.2 ± 21.4 b286.3 ± 2.5 bd338.3 ± 18.3 bd238.8 ± 13.7 ad
8391.3 ± 37.9 bc433.0 ± 7.7 b432.5 ± 35.6 b216.3 ± 26.6 d304.3 ± 52.2 b188.3 ± 3.6 ad
12417.7 ± 58.8 bc447.2 ± 11.5 b434.3 ± 2.5 b256.3 ± 38.7 bd242.4 ± 30.8 bd172.2 ± 4.9 a
16408.3 ± 27.4 bc391.7 ± 9.1 b400.0 ± 3.3 b259.9 ± 58.4 d255.0 ± 68.5 d158.3 ± 10.9 a
Total386.2 ± 18.2 bc372.6 ± 10.8 b383.3 ± 3.7 b238.2 ± 27.6 bd281.3 ± 33.8 bd182.6 ± 3.2 a
Female
1306.5 ± 11.9 bc302.7 ± 46.4 b314.9 ± 14.6 b284.8 ± 13.7 b260.9 ± 12.4 bd180.5 ± 5.3 a
4414.7 ± 25.2 b406.5 ± 18.8 b397.5 ± 2.7 b344.5 ± 32.3 b347.2 ± 37.4 b180.8 ± 10.0 a
8333.8 ± 20.6 bc419.9 ± 18.2 bd408.7 ± 12.4 bd364.2 ± 39.2 b334.3 ± 21.2 b139.9 ± 25.6 a
12403.0 ± 30.7 bc407.5 ± 28.9 b448.6 ± 35.6 b278.0 ± 28.9 bd272.8 ± 20.1 bd154.9 ± 34.1 a
16367.5 ± 11.9 bc390.8 ± 2.8 bd461.5 ± 37.3 bd308.3 ± 3.6 bd315.8 ± 33.7 b140.8 ± 13.7 a
Total350.1 ± 22.9 bc364.2 ± 9.1 b379.6 ± 30.8 b296.8 ± 19.0 bd281.2 ± 5.2 bd154.6 ± 18.5 a
The values represent the weekly intake averages ± standard deviation of the groups that consumed sucrose, high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), or dextrose at 7%, or sucralose and stevia at 0.3%, and the group with water (control). Different letters in each row indicate significant differences between groups according to ANOVA test, p < 0.05. The total represents the average consumption over the 16 weeks of treatment.
Table 2. Adipose tissue (mg/g body weight) of Wistar rats with chronic consumption of caloric and non-caloric sweeteners.
Table 2. Adipose tissue (mg/g body weight) of Wistar rats with chronic consumption of caloric and non-caloric sweeteners.
Males
GroupGonadalMesentericRetroperitonealTotal
Sucrose2.8 ± 0.382.4 ± 0.313.5 ± 0.918.7 ± 1.2
HFCS2.3 ± 0.292.2 ± 0.523.2 ± 0.347.7 ± 0.62
Dextrose3.7 ± 0.61 b2.8 ± 0.80 b3.9 ± 1.210.4 ± 2.5 b
Sucralose2.9 ± 0.261.9 ± 0.383.3 ± 0.498.0 ± 0.91
Stevia3.1 ± 0.532.2 ± 0.214.6 ± 0.64 b10 ± 1.16 b
Control2.3 ± 0.33 a1.7 ± 0.32 a2.7 ± 0.19 a6.7 ± 0.60 a
Females
Sucrose3.3 ± 0.941.5 ± 0.561.6 ± 0.506.4 ± 1.9
HFCS4.7 ± 0.81 b1.9 ± 0.482.2 ± 0.568.9 ± 0.43 b
Dextrose4.1 ± 0.24 b1.7 ± 0.452.2 ± 0.567.8 ± 0.45 b
Sucralose3.4 ± 0.491.8 ± 0.302.1 ± 0.567.3 ± 0.72
Stevia1.7 ± 0.551.4 ± 0.141.6 ± 0.084.7 ± 0.64
Control2.2 ± 0.75 a1.2 ± 0.441.7 ± 0.665.2 ± 0.46 a
The values represent the averages of gonadal, mesenteric, and retroperitoneal adipose tissue ± standard deviation of the groups that consumed AIN 93 M food, and 7% solution of sucrose or high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) or dextrose and plain water (control); different letters in the same column indicate significant differences between groups according to ANOVA test, p < 0.05.
Table 3. Serum metabolic and adiposity indicators in Wistar rats following chronic consumption of beverages caloric and non-caloric sweeteners.
Table 3. Serum metabolic and adiposity indicators in Wistar rats following chronic consumption of beverages caloric and non-caloric sweeteners.
Males
GroupGlucose (mg/dL)Triglycerides (mg/dL)ColT (mg/dL)ColHDL (mg/dL)Insulin (ng/mL)Leptin (ng/mL)Adiponectin (ng/mL)
Sucrose94.0 ± 9.8257.0 ± 15.6 b73.1 ± 12.927.5 ± 3.61.2 ± 1.217.7 ±8.336.5 ± 7.2
HFCS94.6 ± 11.8273.0 ± 44.7 b80.3 ± 15.432.7 ± 5.40.4 ± 0.2 b19.1 ± 8.837.6 ± 6.1
Dextrose72.0 ± 8.0299.7 ± 62.3 b75.9 ± 9.527.0 ± 4.81.9 ± 1.3 a21.3 ± 9.136.2 ± 5.6
Sucralose85.8 ± 16.7352.4 ± 36.2 b94.3 ± 7.026.6 ± 3.11.8 ± 1.4 a17.8 ± 9.827.7 ± 7.0
Stevia87.0 ± 7.2242.3 ± 36.4 b89.4 ± 6.339.3 ± 8.0 b0.9 ± 0.218.8 ± 6.728.6 ± 6.9
Control78.8 ± 7.0122.3 ± 51.2 a73.7 ± 7.428.7 ± 3.9 a1.7 ± 1.714.7 ± 5.828.8 ± 12.1
Females
Sucrose63.8 ± 12.0105.8 ± 32.1 b77.7 ± 11.233.6 ± 2.70.4 ± 0.15.2 ± 2.929.6 ± 4.2
HFCS90.4 ± 11.8 b61.2 ± 21.183.7 ± 18.334.4 ± 2.50.4 ± 0.14.9 ± 4.628.6 ± 8.4
Dextrose60.6 ± 19.288.4 ± 22.8 b100.1 ± 18.439.9 ± 4.70.8 ± 0.4 b6.8 ± 3.136.5 ± 5.0
Sucralose67.5 ± 9.9108.9 ± 15.7 b76.1 ± 12.934.3 ± 3.10.3 ± 0.1 a3.0 ± 1.127.5 ± 8.5
Stevia70.9 ± 10.063.4 ± 18.982.6 ± 12.336.6 ± 2.70.5 ± 0.12.4 ± 1.724.8 ± 4.6
Control65.1 ± 10.5 a56.0 ± 6.1 a72.0 ± 9.136.8 ± 5.20.7 ± 0.12.8 ± 1.825.1 ± 5.8
Data represent serum averages ± standard deviation. Total cholesterol (ColT). HDL cholesterol (ColHDL). The groups consumed AIN 93 M and 7% sucrose or high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) or dextrose, and 0.3% sucralose or stevia solution, and water (control); different letters in the same column indicate significant differences between groups for the ANOVA test, p < 0.05.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

López-Rodríguez, G.; Galván, M.; Galván-Valencia, O.; Gómez-Castillo, J. Gain of Body Fat and Intake of Energy in Rats with Low Dose of Caloric and Non-Caloric Sweeteners Used in Reformulation Beverage in Mexico. Beverages 2025, 11, 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages11030069

AMA Style

López-Rodríguez G, Galván M, Galván-Valencia O, Gómez-Castillo J. Gain of Body Fat and Intake of Energy in Rats with Low Dose of Caloric and Non-Caloric Sweeteners Used in Reformulation Beverage in Mexico. Beverages. 2025; 11(3):69. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages11030069

Chicago/Turabian Style

López-Rodríguez, Guadalupe, Marcos Galván, Oscar Galván-Valencia, and Jocelyn Gómez-Castillo. 2025. "Gain of Body Fat and Intake of Energy in Rats with Low Dose of Caloric and Non-Caloric Sweeteners Used in Reformulation Beverage in Mexico" Beverages 11, no. 3: 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages11030069

APA Style

López-Rodríguez, G., Galván, M., Galván-Valencia, O., & Gómez-Castillo, J. (2025). Gain of Body Fat and Intake of Energy in Rats with Low Dose of Caloric and Non-Caloric Sweeteners Used in Reformulation Beverage in Mexico. Beverages, 11(3), 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages11030069

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop