Evidence Hub

Food additive emulsifiers and the risk of type 2 diabetes: analysis of data from the NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort study

C. Salamé, G. Javaux, L. Sellem, E. Viennois, F. S. de Edelenyi, C. Agaësse, Alexandre Franco de Sá, I. Huybrechts et al.

The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology, 2024

104 participants · 47 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Experimental studies have suggested potential detrimental effects of emulsifiers on gut microbiota, inflammation, and metabolic perturbations. We aimed to investigate the associations between exposures to food additive emulsifiers and the risk of type 2 diabetes in a large prospective cohort of French adults.

METHODS

We analysed data from 104 139 adults enrolled in the French NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort study from May 1, 2009, to April 26, 2023; 82 456 (79·2%) were female and the mean age was 42·7 years (SD 14·5). Dietary intakes were assessed with three 24 h dietary records collected over three non-consecutive days, every 6 months. Exposure to additive emulsifiers was evaluated through multiple food composition databases and ad-hoc laboratory assays. Associations between cumulative time-dependent exposures to food additive emulsifiers and the risk of type 2 diabetes were characterised with multivariable proportional hazards Cox models adjusted for known risk factors. The NutriNet-Santé study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03335644).

FINDINGS

Of 104 139 participants, 1056 were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes during follow-up (mean follow-up duration 6·8 years [SD 3·7]). Intakes of the following emulsifiers were associated with an increased risk of type 2 diabetes: total carrageenans (hazard ratio [HR] 1·03 [95% CI 1·01-1·05] per increment of 100 mg per day, p<0·0001), carrageenans gum (E407; HR 1·03 [1·01-1·05] per increment of 100 mg per day,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 104 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free