A groundbreaking report released today claims that aspartame, an artificial sweetener found in popular soft drinks like Diet Coke and Dr Pepper, will soon be classified as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” by the World Health Organization (WHO). This reclassification has raised questions about the nature of aspartame, its presence in various products, and the safe limits for consumption. In this article, we will explore these questions and shed light on the subject.
Aspartame, which was accidentally discovered in the 1960s and introduced into the market about 20 years later, is approximately 200 times sweeter than sugar. This means that it requires a smaller quantity to achieve the same level of sweetness, resulting in lower-calorie products. Notably, unlike sugar, aspartame does not raise blood sugar levels, making it suitable for diabetics. Chemically, aspartame is composed of three substances: aspartic acid (40%), phenylalanine (50%), and methanol (10%).
Aspartame is commonly added to a wide range of “diet” or “sugar-free” products. The well-known examples include Diet Coke and Dr Pepper, as well as sugar-free gums like Extra. Other examples encompass low-fat or diet yogurts and jellies. It should also be noted that Coke Zero, Pepsi Max, Fanta, Lucozade, Sprite, and certain brands of squash and juice, such as Robinsons and Ribena, all contain this artificial sweetener. Thus, it is not only confined to stereotypically labeled “diet” drinks, and many consumers may unknowingly be consuming aspartame.
Various health concerns surrounding aspartame have been raised, including anecdotal links to headaches, dizziness, and stomach upsets. However, blind trials where participants remain unaware of whether they are consuming products containing aspartame have failed to replicate these effects. Nevertheless, broader health concerns persist, suggesting that aspartame may potentially cause cancer, alter the gut biome, trigger depression, and even contribute to obesity by increasing appetite. Health and food regulators, following rigorous safety assessments, have repeatedly declared aspartame safe for consumption. It is important to note that people with phenylketonuria, a rare inherited blood condition, are unable to process phenylalanine, one of aspartame’s components, which could eventually lead to organ damage. For this reason, aspartame-containing products must clearly list the ingredient in the US, UK, and other countries. However, only about one in 10,000 people have this condition.
The potential ruling by the WHO regarding aspartame’s carcinogenic risk means that the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the WHO’s subsidiary body, will officially link the consumption of aspartame to cancer. It is expected that aspartame will receive a 2B classification, indicating that it is “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” This falls in the middle of the five categories and suggests that there is some evidence of a cancer-causing potential, although far from conclusive. Aloe vera extract, lead, and several coloring agents also share this same 2B cancer risk status. By comparison, red meat is considered “probably carcinogenic to humans” or 2A, a rank higher than that projected for aspartame. The IARC has previously classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones as a 2B cancer risk and acrylamide, the brown-black substance that forms on food when fried or baked, as a 2A cancer risk. It is important to note that IARC rankings are based on the evidence that a substance or hazard poses a carcinogenic risk to the population as a whole, rather than assessing individual risk.
Regulations and warnings regarding potential cancer risks associated with aspartame will vary from country to country. While no similar warnings have been placed on red or processed meats in the UK, despite stronger links to cancer based on previous IARC rulings, any attempt to include such warnings on aspartame might face opposition from the soft drinks and sweetener industries, as well as those who oppose excessive regulation. However, if the evidence supports it, health authorities, such as the NHS, may provide recommendations on the consumption of aspartame, such as advising individuals to limit their intake to one product containing aspartame per day or week. Such warnings could be included in health information guides, similar to the NHS’s Eat Well guide.
Determining safe levels of aspartame consumption for individuals would be the responsibility of the Joint WHO and Food and Agriculture Organization’s Expert Committee on Food Additives. This committee would provide guidance on recommended consumption levels, which could then be adapted by national health bodies. Currently, the recommended safe daily consumption of aspartame is 50mg per kg of body weight in the US and 40mg per kg of body weight in the UK. For a 70kg adult in the UK, this translates to approximately 2800mg of aspartame. Considering that the average can of Diet Coke contains 180mg of aspartame, the British Dietetic Association states that an adult would need to consume 15 cans a day to reach the acceptable daily intake of the sweetener.
If the IARC ruling indicates a potential cancer risk associated with aspartame, it could lead to consumer backlash, with individuals avoiding products that contain this sweetener due to cancer concerns. Similar boycotts have been seen in response to previous IARC rulings. For instance, after the committee concluded that glyphosate, a herbicide, is “probably carcinogenic,” it faced bans in various countries, states, cities, and local governments. Theoretically, if a similar consumer backlash were to occur concerning aspartame, food and drink companies may choose to reformulate their products to eliminate or reduce the presence of aspartame.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
