MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008
Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008
Journal Article

Socio-demographic correlates and trends in low-calorie sweetener use among adults in the United States from 1999 to 2008

2015
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Background/Objectives: Replacing added sugars in beverages and foods with low-calorie sweeteners (LCSs) is one strategy to reduce calories and manage body weight. There are few studies on LCS consumption by product category and by consumer socio-demographic status. Subjects/Methods: Data for a representative sample of 22 231 adults were obtained from five cycles of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1999–2008 NHANES). A single 24-h recall was used to identify consumers of LCS beverages, foods and tabletop sweeteners. Time-trend analyses were conducted for total LCS consumption and for LCS beverages. Results: Approximately 30% of US adults consumed some type of LCS, with 19.5% consuming LCS beverages, 11.4% consuming tabletop LCS and 4.6% consuming LCS foods. LCS consumption by product category peaked at different ages, with older adults more likely to consume tabletop LCS and LCS foods. In age-adjusted analyses, LCS consumers in every product category were more likely to be women, 45–65 years old, non-Hispanic whites, US-born adults, college graduates and with higher household incomes. Predictors of LCS consumption were not altered upon adjustment for body mass index and diabetes status. LCS consumption from all sources and from LCS beverages increased between 1999 and 2008. Conclusions: LCS use was more common among populations with a lower burden of obesity and related chronic disease, specifically, non-Hispanic whites and those with more education/higher incomes. The reasons for this observed paradox are complex and merit additional research.