Health effects of aspartame draw new scrutiny from WHO experts

After many years since aspartame received approval in the United States, health organizations worldwide are reevaluating the safety of this sweetener due to concerns regarding its possible connection to cancer.

This month, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization (WHO) examined the potential cancer-causing impacts of the sweetener. Meanwhile, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), a committee formed by the WHO and the United Nations, is currently revising its evaluation of risks, including determining a safe daily consumption limit. As of now, their findings have not been disclosed, but they are scheduled to be published on July 14.

Aspartame is a popular sugar substitute utilized in drinks such as Coke Zero Sugar, Diet Coke, Sprite Zero, Pepsi Zero Sugar, and Mountain Dew Zero Sugar. It is also present in chewing gum, cough lozenges, and even certain toothpastes, alongside other items. The US Food and Drug Administration has thoroughly examined aspartame on several occasions and concluded that it poses no harm to the broader public.

The FDA made changes to its website regarding aspartame and other sweeteners in preparation for the WHO examination. The FDA claims that it keeps track of the latest research and the amount of sweeteners consumed by individuals. It also refers to aspartame as "one of the most extensively examined additives in human food."

The two WHO panels consist of autonomous healthcare specialists hailing from various parts of the globe. The International Agency for Research on Cancer scrutinized existing studies to appraise the potential dangers of aspartame, while the findings from the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives will present suggestions on the permissible amount of aspartame an individual can consume without adverse effects.

The cancer research committee has a wide array of substances known as carcinogens, as stated by Qi Sun, a nutrition and epidemiology associate professor at Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health. To illustrate, they classify mobile devices as "potential carcinogens," which implies that there are some but not strong connections between these products and cancer in humans.

However, Sun assures consumers that there is no need to be concerned. The determination of whether aspartame can be classified as a carcinogen ultimately depends on the nature of the evidence available, according to his statement.

He expressed his opinion that the available evidence is not sufficient to make a definite claim about whether aspartame is cancer-causing or to propose that aspartame is less likely to cause cancer.

"I believe it is important to acknowledge the uncertainty surrounding this matter," expressed James Farrell, a specialist in gastrointestinal cancer from Yale School of Medicine, when discussing the safety of aspartame. "Those who have brought up this concern have valid motives backed by medical and scientific analysis. Disregarding their viewpoint would be unwise."

Health officials in the United States expressed their worries regarding the World Health Organization conducting two distinct evaluations well before the gatherings held this month.

In an August correspondence, the US Department of Health and Human Services expressed concerns regarding the World Health Organization's simultaneous evaluations of aspartame. The department warned that these assessments might lead to contradictory conclusions, which could significantly erode trust in the scientific procedure and worsen the prevailing doubt in the credibility of science and its processes.

HHS stated in their correspondence that the exclusive evaluator of cancer risks associated with aspartame in food should be the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives.

In reply, WHO stated that the evaluations conducted by these groups would serve as a supplement to each other. The committee responsible for cancer research, which has never before examined aspartame, would evaluate its possible cancer risk. The committee overseeing food additives would revise its assessment of the dangers, including the recommended daily intake of aspartame. The findings of the first group would only encompass a portion of the second group's evaluation, according to WHO.

The FDA shared both letters on the internet.

The committees of the World Health Organization (WHO) are made up of individuals from different countries, but the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will independently determine its own recommendations regarding aspartame. According to Sun, once the reports are published in July, the FDA will likely assess the supporting information, but they are not required to modify their existing regulations.

The American Beverage Association, which advocates for beverage manufacturers like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, affirmed on Thursday that prioritizing safety is of utmost importance.

Our confidence in the safety of our products is reinforced by the consistent affirmation of aspartame's safety by food safety agencies around the world, including the FDA.

WHO recently advised against the usage of sugar alternatives for weight loss, stating that while they may have initial effects, they do not contribute to the long-term reduction of obesity.

"Similar to all aspects of life, it is important to approach everything with a balanced mindset," Farrell expressed. "If they provide information that indicates or raises concerns about the safety of aspartame ... if you have the ability to restrict your consumption, it would be wise to consider that option, wouldn't it?"

According to Sun, if you're aiming to decrease your sugar consumption, artificial sweeteners such as aspartame could be a temporary option worth considering. However, in the grand scheme of things, there are far superior alternatives when it comes to choosing what to drink. Water, unsweetened teas, or reduced-fat milk are all backed by extensive research and offer greater health benefits.

Sun stated that in his opinion, individuals have the potential to conveniently transition to household drinks in order to enhance their well-being, rather than being worried about the consumption of artificially sweetened beverages and the possibility of developing cancer. Sun mentioned that currently there is no supportive or conflicting evidence available on this matter.