WHO's cancer agency to declare popular sweetener aspartame as possible carcinogenic

A leading global health organization is poised to declare one of the world's most commonly used artificial sweeteners as a potential carcinogen.

Aspartame in July will reportedly be listed as a "possibly carcinogenic to humans” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer research arm of the World Health Organization (WHO), reported Reuters citing two sources.. 

Aspartame is found in various products ranging from diet sodas by Coca-Cola to Mars' Extra chewing gum and some Snapple drinks as well.

This decision follows a recent meeting of external experts from the IARC who reviewed all available evidence to determine the potential hazard.

IARC's ruling focuses on assessing whether a substance poses a potential risk, irrespective of the safe consumption limits for individuals. The WHO's Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), responsible for providing advice on safe consumption levels, will also be evaluating aspartame this year. JECFA's findings, along with those of the IARC, are scheduled to be announced on July 14. 

According to a spokesperson from the IARC, the findings of both the IARC and JECFA committees regarding aspartame are currently confidential and will be disclosed in July. The spokesperson highlighted that the conclusions of the two committees are complementary in nature. 

The IARC's conclusion is considered the initial essential step in comprehending the potential carcinogenicity of aspartame. On the other hand, the additives committee (JECFA) focuses on conducting a risk assessment that evaluates the likelihood of specific harm, such as cancer, occurring under certain conditions and levels of exposure.

Since 1981, JECFA has maintained that aspartame is safe within accepted daily limits. This view has been widely supported by national regulators, including those in the United States and Europe. It is based on the quantity of aspartame a person can safely consume.

The IARC's previous rulings on different substances have raised concerns among consumers, resulting in lawsuits and compelling manufacturers to reformulate their products and seek alternatives. Some critics argue that the IARC's assessments can be perplexing for the general public. 

Industry and regulators have expressed apprehension about the concurrent timing of the IARC and JECFA evaluations, fearing potential confusion. In a letter dated March 27 and reviewed by Reuters, an official from Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare urged both bodies to coordinate their efforts and release their conclusions simultaneously to avoid any public confusion or concerns.

"We kindly ask both bodies to coordinate their efforts in reviewing Aspartame to avoid any confusion or concerns among the public," Nozomi Tomita, an official from Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, wrote in a letter dated March 27 to WHO's deputy director general, Zsuzsanna Jakab.

The IARC's decisions hold significant weight and can have far-reaching consequences. For instance, in 2015, the IARC classified glyphosate, a herbicide, as "probably carcinogenic," despite differing opinions from other bodies such as the European Food Safety Authority. This decision resulted in ongoing repercussions for companies such as Germany's Bayer, which faced lawsuits from customers attributing their cancers to glyphosate-based weedkillers.

Critics have accused the IARC of causing unnecessary alarm by classifying certain substances or situations as potentially cancer-causing, including working overnight, consuming red meat, and using mobile phones. 

Frances Hunt-Wood, the secretary general of the International Sweeteners Association (ISA), emphasised that the IARC is not a food safety body and expressed concerns over the review of aspartame, deeming it scientifically incomplete and heavily reliant on discredited research. The ISA, representing members such as Mars Wrigley, Coca-Cola, and Cargill, raises serious concerns about the IARC review potentially misleading consumers.

Aspartame has undergone extensive research over the years. In a recent observational study in France involving 100,000 adults, a slightly higher cancer risk was observed among those who consumed larger quantities of artificial sweeteners, including aspartame. 

However, this study did not establish a causal relationship between aspartame consumption and increased cancer risk. 

Questions have also been raised about the methodology of an earlier study conducted by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy, which reported a link between aspartame and certain cancers in mice and rats. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) scrutinised this study and raised concerns about its methodology.

Regulators worldwide have authorised the use of aspartame based on a thorough review of the available evidence, and major food and beverage companies have defended its use for several decades.

 The IARC's June review reportedly examined 1,300 studies. Notably, the classification of aspartame as a possible carcinogen aims to encourage further research to help agencies, consumers, and manufacturers arrive at more definitive conclusions. However, it is likely to reignite debates concerning the role of the IARC and the overall safety of sweeteners.

Last month, the WHO released guidelines advising against the use of non-sugar sweeteners for weight control, which sparked controversy in the food industry. Industry representatives argue that these sweeteners can be beneficial for consumers seeking to reduce their sugar intake.

(Inputs from Reuters)

Also Watch | Maruti Suzuki Brezza, Kia Sonet, Hyundai Venue, XUV 300 – Cars under Rs 13 lakh with an electric sunroof

Also Watch | Top smartphones launching in July 2023: Nothing Phone (2), OnePlus Nord 3 5G, Motorola Razr 40 series and more