What does it mean? Do you need to worry?, Aspartame may be classified as a "possible carcinogen" or "possible carcinogen" by a WHO agency | Aspartame

According to Reuters on the 29th, citing sources familiar with the matter, aspartame may be listed as a potential carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a subsidiary of the World Health Organization. This has caused a huge uproar in the food industry and sparked heated discussions among domestic and foreign netizens. As one of the most common artificial sweeteners in the world, aspartame can be found on the ingredient lists of various weight loss foods or zero sugar drinks, including low sugar or sugar free cola, chewing gum, and yogurt. Do consumers need to worry about the possibility of aspartame causing cancer?

Or listed as a "possible carcinogen"

Aspartame is a non carbohydrate artificial sweetener. Because it is about 200 times sweeter than ordinary sugar and contains less calories than ordinary sucrose, many dieters and diabetes patients use it as a substitute for sugar.

As an "old-fashioned" sweetener, aspartame has been approved and widely used for nearly 50 years, added to over 6000 types of food. However, controversy over aspartame has always existed. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, a subsidiary of the World Health Organization, has also been evaluating approximately 1300 studies on the relationship between aspartame and cancer.

On June 29th, Reuters reported, citing sources familiar with the matter, that aspartame may be listed as a "potentially carcinogenic substance to the human body" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in July. The above conclusion was determined after a recent external expert meeting, according to the report. The conference mainly evaluates whether certain substances have potential hazards based on published research evidence.

In addition to the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives under the World Health Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization is also evaluating aspartame this year.

According to a spokesperson for the International Agency for Research on Cancer, the research findings of the two institutions will complement each other. The study by the International Agency for Research on Cancer will demonstrate the potential for aspartame to cause cancer, while another agency will determine the risk of specific harm at different intake levels.

Reuters reported that the two institutions are expected to release their investigation results on the same day on July 14th.

Food industry rebounds

What does it mean if aspartame is listed as "potentially carcinogenic" by the International Agency for Research on Cancer?

The public opinion points out that although "possibly carcinogenic" may sound alarming, in reality it may only be a lower level of carcinogenesis.

Public information shows that according to the organization's classification, carcinogens are classified into four categories: Class 1, Class 2A, Class 2B, and Class 3.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer believes that processed meat, asbestos, cigarettes, alcohol, etc. all belong to Class 1, while overnight work, red meat, etc. belong to Class 2A. The 2B category that aspartame may belong to also includes radio frequency electromagnetic fields and pickled vegetables that come into contact with mobile phones.

Many industries have criticized the International Agency for Research on Cancer for excessively expanding its list of carcinogens, causing unnecessary panic. After news spread that aspartame was considered a potential carcinogen, it also faced a rebound in the food industry.

Francis Hunter Wood, Secretary General of the International Sweetener Association, where food companies such as Coca Cola and Mars Arrow are located, stated that the organization is not a food safety agency, and their assessment of aspartame is not scientifically comprehensive and largely based on some widely questioned research.

The International Beverage Association Committee also condemned that the decision may unnecessarily mislead consumers into consuming more sugar instead of choosing safe sugar free or low sugar alternatives.

Do consumers need to worry?

In fact, the controversy surrounding the safety of aspartame has a long history.

Last year, an observational study of 100000 adults in France showed that those who consumed large amounts of artificial sweeteners had a slightly higher risk of cancer. At the beginning of the 21st century, a study by the Italian Ramazini Institute also claimed that some cancers in experimental mice were related to aspartame. There are also studies suggesting that the side effects of aspartame include an increased risk of developing brain tumors, blindness, and causing cognitive confusion.

However, relevant studies cannot prove that these increased risks are related to aspartame. Government agencies around the world also hold a cautious attitude towards this.

Since 1981, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives has determined that consuming small amounts of aspartame daily is safe, and an adult weighing 60 kilograms needs to drink 12 to 36 cans of sugar free drinks per day to pose a risk. At present, most regulatory agencies in Europe and America agree with this viewpoint.

Regarding the controversy, James Farrell, a gastroenterologist at Yale University School of Medicine, believes that consumers should not overlook this issue, as relevant institutions have suggested that aspartame may cause cancer and there must be objective reasons behind it.

Sun Qi, Associate Professor of Nutrition and Epidemiology at Harvard School of Public Health, believes that consumers do not necessarily need to worry. There is not enough evidence to support whether aspartame is carcinogenic or not.

However, he stated that although artificial sweeteners are a good substitute for reducing sugar intake, in the long run, purified water, unsweetened tea, or low-fat milk are better choices for consumers, and their health benefits have been extensively supported by research.