The report of the international organization on the consumption of Aspartame will be revealed in the coming days and will not leave anyone indifferent. It is disturbing to discover that the artificial sweetener, present in many mass consumption foods, is promoted as sugar free. It is important to be aware of this situation and demand greater transparency from the food industry.
According to two sources familiar with the lawsuit, a major global health body will soon declare that one of the world’s most common artificial sweeteners may be carcinogenic. This decision will put the food industry and regulatory bodies at odds.
Aspartame, the sweetener used in products such as diet sodas and chewing gum, will be classified for the first time in July as “possibly carcinogenic to humans“. This new classification by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization (WHO), could have important implications for the food and beverage industry. sources said.
The IARC opinion, which was finalized earlier this month after a meeting of experts outside the group, aims to assess whether or not something poses a potential danger. For this, it is based on all the evidence published to date.
consumer concern
It is important to consider the safe amount of consumption of a product by one person. The WHO has another expert committee on food additives called JECFA (Joint WHO-Food and Agriculture Organization Expert Committee on Food Additives), which provides advice to people on the subject, along with the determinations of national regulatory bodies.
However, it is important to note that, in the past, similar opinions issued by the IARC on different substances have raised concerns among consumers about their use. These decisions also led to lawsuits and pressured manufacturers to reformulate their products and look for alternatives. It is understandable that some people criticize the IARC assessments as being confusing to the general public.
The new classification on the use of aspartame will be published in mid-July
JECFA, which is the WHO committee charged with evaluating food additives, is currently conducting a review of the use of aspartame. Its meeting began at the end of June and it is expected to announce its conclusions on the same day that the CIIC makes its decision public, ie 14 July.
Since 1981, the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) has confirmed that aspartame is safe to consume within accepted daily limits. For example, for a 60kg adult to be at risk, he would need to consume between 12 and 36 cans of diet soda per day (depending on the amount of aspartame in the drink). National regulatory bodies, including those in the United States and Europe, have largely shared this view.
An IARC spokesperson stated that the conclusions of both committees are confidential until July, but added that they are “additional” and that the IARC conclusion represents the critical first step in understanding carcinogenicity. The additive committee is responsible for conducting the risk assessment, which determines the likelihood that a specific type of harm (eg cancer) will occur under specific conditions and exposure levels.
Concern about possible confusion
Industry and regulators are expressing concern that carrying out both processes simultaneously could lead to confusion, according to letters from US and Japanese regulators obtained by Reuters news agency.
“We kindly ask both bodies to coordinate their efforts in reviewing aspartame to avoid any confusion or concern among the public.”Wrote Nozomi Tomita, an official at the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare, in a letter dated March 27 to WHO Deputy Director General Zsuzsanna Jakab.
In the letter, it was requested that the findings of both organizations be made public simultaneously, as is currently the case. So far, the Japanese mission in Geneva, where the WHO is headquartered, has not responded to this request for comment.
The debate about carcinogenic substances
The opinions of the CIIC, the International Committee for Research on Cancer, are very important because of the possible consequences they may cause. In 2015, this committee concluded that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic“, which generated a major impact in terms of health and regulation. Despite objections from other bodies such as the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), companies continued to feel the effects of the decision years later.
In 2021, the German company Bayer lost its third appeal in the United States courts in cases involving customer lawsuits that attributed the development of cancer to the use of its glyphosate-based herbicides. These verdicts awarded compensation for damages to those affected.
CIIC decisions have received criticism for being considered to generate unwarranted alarms regarding substances or situations that are difficult to avoid. In the past, night work and the consumption of red meat were considered “probably carcinogenic“, while the use of mobile phones was classified as “possibly carcinogenic“, as well as aspartame.
The concern of large companies with the new classification of aspartame
“IARC is not a food safety agency and its review of aspartame is not scientifically exhaustive and is largely based on widely discredited research.,” said Frances Hunt-Wood, secretary general of the International Sweeteners Association (ISA).
This body has the participation of important companies such as Mars Wrigley, a unit of Coca-Cola and Cargill, which have expressed their support and their “deep concern about the IARC review, which may mislead consumers”.
Kate Loatman, executive director of the International Council of Beverage Associations, expressed concern about the “leaked opinion“. According to her, public health authorities must take this seriously and be aware of the potential risks it may entail. It is important that it be investigated and that appropriate measures be taken to ensure the safety and well-being of the population, having also warned that “could unnecessarily trick consumers into consuming more sugar rather than choosing safe low- or no-sugar options”.
Studies on this artificial sweetener
Aspartame has several investigations and studies over several years. An observational study conducted in France last year that included 100,000 adult participants found that those who consumed large amounts of artificial sweeteners such as aspartame had a slightly higher risk of cancer.
In the 2000s, the Ramazzini Institute in Italy conducted a study that found a possible link between aspartame and certain types of cancer in mice and rats. This research has generated interest and debate about the possible health effects of aspartame.
However, the first study failed to show that aspartame causes an increased risk of cancer. In addition, doubts were raised about the methodology of the second study, even the EFSA evaluated and questioned.
Aspartame is approved for use worldwide by the appropriate regulatory bodies after extensive review of all available evidence. Major food and beverage manufacturers have endorsed the use of this ingredient for decades.
According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), approximately 1,300 studies were evaluated in their June review. This review demonstrates the rigorous research process undertaken by the IARC to obtain accurate and reliable information about cancer and its risk factors.
Papsico and its antecedent with aspartame
Recent changes to Pepsico’s product formulas underscore the challenge the industry faces in finding a balance between consumer taste preferences and health concerns. In 2015, PepsiCo decided to remove aspartame from its soft drinks. However, a year later they opted to include it again. Surprisingly, in 2020 they made the decision to pull it again.
More investigations to get more solid conclusions
According to sources close to the CIIC, the inclusion of aspartame in the list of possible carcinogens aims to encourage further research. This will help agencies, consumers and manufacturers to draw more solid conclusions on the subject.
This fact is very likely to generate new discussions about the role of the IARC and also about the safety of sweeteners in general.
The World Health Organization recently issued guidelines recommending that consumers not using sugar-free sweeteners as a method of controlling body weight. The food industry has been affected by the controversial guidelines. On the other hand, it is argued that these can be beneficial for consumers interested in reducing their dietary sugar intake.
With information from: http://fundavida.org.ar/
