Sweet news: No evidence that artificial sweetener aspartame’s bad for you

Everyone who works in a chemistry laboratory knows that you don’t use your taste receptors to check if an unknown chemical is safe or deadly poisonous (or if you do, you may do it only once). But if this hadn’t inadvertently happened in one lab, the most commonly used artificial sweetener today may never have been discovered.

In 1965, a chemist working with amino acids (the building blocks of protein) created a new chemical by combining the amino acids aspartic acid and phenylalanine. He didn’t realise that some of this novel substance had spilled onto a piece of paper lying on the laboratory bench. The chemist licked his finger to pick up the paper and inadvertently transferred some of the chemical into his mouth.

Luckily, he lived to tell the tale. What he had to tell was extraordinary and completely unexpected. By combining two of the building blocks of protein (which has no sweetness), he had created a substance that was about 200 times as sweet as sugar!

Dubbed “aspartame”, the newly-created chemical was found to provide virtually no kilojoules in the minute quantity needed to sweeten a beverage or solid food.

After extensive safety testing, aspartame was approved for use in Europe and the United States in the 1980s. Its use as a sweetener in a range of foods at specified levels is also permitted in Australia and New Zealand.

Indeed, it is now the most widely used artificial sweetener in the world, and is sold in Australia most commonly under the brand names NutraSweet and Equal.

Hoax claims about aspartame have been circulating on the internet for many years. They suggest it was first developed as an ant poison, and that it is broken down in the body to release formaldehyde, leading to health problems such as severe seizures, brain damage, lupus and birth defects. No credible scientific evidence has ever been found for any of these claims.

Of more substance is the claim that artificial sweeteners, including aspartame, may be a cause of cancer. Rat studies have shown an association between the consumption of these sweeteners and cancer incidence.

But, as the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) pointed out in 2007, the rat studies involved intakes “far greater than humans could consume in foods and drinks”. The WCRF concluded that “The evidence … does not suggest that chemical sweeteners have a detectable effect on the risk of any cancer.”

Another comprehensive review of the safety of aspartame, also published in 2007, came to a similar conclusion: “The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a non‑nutritive sweetener.”

In 2010, two studies reported possible associations between aspartame and a slight increase in adverse health outcomes. After carefully reviewing these studies the European Food Standards Agency (EFSA) concluded that these studies “do not give reason to reconsider previous safety assessments of aspartame …”

But taking an appropriately cautious approach, the report also stated that “… the EFSA will continue monitoring the scientific literature in order to identify new scientific evidence for sweeteners that may indicate a possible risk for human health or which may otherwise affect the safety assessment of these food additives.”

The most recent (March 2013) review of the literature by the EFSA concludes that “There is no consistent evidence that aspartame has adverse effects, either in healthy individuals or in potentially susceptible groups …”

The 2012 position paper of the US Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics also endorses the safety of aspartame by stating that “… consumers can safely enjoy a range of nutritive sweeteners and non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS).” Aspartame is included in the seven non-nutritive sweeteners that are approved for use.

The position paper also points out that the estimated safe level of daily intake of aspartame over a lifetime is 50 milligrams per kilogram of body weight. With typical intakes estimated to be in the range 0.2 to 4.1 mg/kg, the rate of consumption of aspartame by virtually everyone is likely to be less than 10% of the maximum recommended level.

But there is one potential adverse health effect associated with the use of aspartame – a metabolic genetic condition called phenylketonuria (a mutation that makes an enzyme non-functional) affects about one person in 10,000. People with phenylketonuria cannot metabolise phenylalanine (which, you will recall, is one of the two protein building blocks that make up aspartame), so those people need to minimise intake of all sources of phenylalanine, including aspartame.

So, can I put my hand on my heart and swear that aspartame is safe for everyone other than people with phenylketonuria?

No, I can’t. Still, based on the evidence currently available, if I wanted to reduce my sugar intake but still enjoy sweetened tea or coffee, I would have no hesitation in using aspartame (or any of the other approved non-nutritive sweeteners).

Chris Forbes-Ewan received funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council in 2006 for his contribution to the development of Nutrient Reference Values for Australia and New Zealand. His contribution was in the area of estimated energy requirements.

The Conversation



























































































This article was originally published at The Conversation. Read the original article.

Send this to a friend