WeeklySA_AdminCLASSIFICATION: The World Health Organization issues a warning on aspartame, but says further research needed “due to limited evidence” to support its findings…
By Len Maseko
The World Health Organization (WHO) yesterday classified aspartame, the artificial sweetener widely used for diet soft drinks and other food products, as possibly a cause of cancer to human beings – an announcement that has caused ripples far and wide.
But the agency pointed out that its declaration was based on limited evidence and more research was needed on the topic. The assessment of the health impact of the sugar substitute was released by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA).
Citing “limited evidence”, the IARC (a WHO agency) classified aspartame as possibly carcinogenic (cancer-causing) to humans yesterday – following an evaluation of the substance by a working group consisting of 25 independent experts from 12 different countries last month.
But the JECFA differed, reaffirming that the artificial sweetener was safe when taken according to the acceptable daily intake of the substance 0-40 mg/kg body weight. It said there was no convincing evidence of a link between aspartame and cancer in humans, and that people could still safely consume the sweetener in moderate amounts.
A sentiment shared by the US Food and Drug Administration, which also disagreed with the WHO findings, adding that conclusions about aspartame being “possibly carcinogenic to humans” did not mean that it was “actually linked to cancer”.
Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide, accounting for nearly 10 million deaths in 2020, or nearly one in six deaths, according to the WHO.
In South Africa, cancer deaths are on the rise in South Africa. This is according to research by the Health Department’s National Cancer Registry and Stats SA, dating from 2008 to 2019. It found that the black African populations were most at risk.
Cancer-related mortality was based on 43 613 cancer deaths over the 10 years. Overall, deaths in SA have decreased during that time by 24.1% from 598 553 in 2008 to 454 014 in 2018. But, at the same time, cancer deaths increased by 29.3% from 33 720 in 2008 to 43 613 in 2018.
Meanwhile, the WHO said aspartame was safe to consume within a daily limit of 40 milligrams per kilogram of a person’s body weight. An adult weighing 70 kilograms or 154 pounds would have to drink more than nine to 14 cans of aspartame-containing soda daily to exceed the limit and potentially face health risks.
Therefore, the JECFA reaffirmed that it was safe for a person to consume within this limit per day with, for example, a can of diet soft drink containing 200 or 300 mg of aspartame.
The IARC has identified a possible link between aspartame and a type of liver cancer called hepatocellular carcinoma after reviewing three large human studies conducted in the US and Europe that examined artificially sweetened beverages.
The artificial sweetener is commonly used in thousands of products including diet fizzy drinks, ice cream and chewing gum is to be listed as posing a possible cancer risk to humans from next month, according to reports. It is also used in energy drinks, as well, as in gelatin, ice cream, dairy products such as yogurt, breakfast cereal, toothpaste and medications such as cough drops and chewable vitamins Artificially sweetened beverages have historically been the biggest source of exposure to aspartame, according to Lancet Oncology.
Dr Francesco Branca, Director of the Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, WHO, said:“Cancer is one of the leading causes of death globally. Every year, 1 in 6 people die from cancer. Science is continuously expanding to assess the possible initiating or facilitating factors of cancer, in the hope of reducing these numbers and the human toll. The assessments of aspartame have indicated that, while safety is not a major concern at the doses which are commonly used, potential effects have been described that need to be investigated by more and better studies.”
Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan of the IARC, said: “The findings of limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and animals, and of limited mechanistic evidence on how carcinogenicity may occur, underscore the need for more research to refine our understanding on whether consumption of aspartame poses a carcinogenic hazard”.
Dr Moez Sanaa, WHO’s Head of the Standards and Scientific Advice on Food and Nutrition Unit, said: “JECFA also considered the evidence on cancer risk, in animal and human studies, and concluded that the evidence of an association between aspartame consumption and cancer in humans is not convincing. We need better studies with longer follow-up and repeated dietary questionnaires in existing cohorts”. – Additional information from the WHO, New York Times and News24
US BEVERAGE INDUSTRY RESPONSE
Around the world, the powerful beverage industry has fought long and hard against any regulatory or scientific finding that tied artificial sweetener use to risks of cancer or other health problems, the New York Times reports. Aspartame is only the latest battleground for multinational companies to push back against new studies or potential links to health risks.
“Aspartame is safe,” Kevin Keane, interim president of the American Beverage Association, said in a statement to New York Times. He cited the duelling WHO announcements, singling out the second panel, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives, that performed a concurrent review and left its recommended daily intake amount unchanged. It also deemed the evidence for cancer in humans “not convincing,” a WHO summary shows.
“After a rigorous review, the World Health Organization finds aspartame is safe and ‘no sufficient reason to change the previously established acceptable daily intake,’” Mr. Keane said. “This strong conclusion reinforces the position of the FDA. and food safety agencies from more than 90 countries.”
Coca-Cola referred questions to the American Beverage Association and PepsiCo did not respond to requests for comment. – New York Times
