It uncovered eight WHO panelists involved with assessing safe levels of aspartame consumption who are beverage industry consultants who currently or previously worked with the alleged Coke front group, International Life Sciences Institute (Ilsi).

Their involvement in developing intake guidelines represents “an obvious conflict of interest”, said Gary Ruskin, US Right-To-Know’s executive director. “Because of this conflict of interest, [the daily intake] conclusions about aspartame are not credible, and the public should not rely on them,” he added.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    159
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’ve studied this chemical literally more than any other food additive and there’s still nothing definitive. Also mice are not a good stand-in for humans. They are really only used for acute toxicity and such.

    • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      But the mice genetically predisposed to getting tumors got tumors. What more proof do you need?

    • Mawks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I honestly have no clue on the studies but I can’t drink anything with aspartame in it at all, even a single sip bloats me and screws up my bowel movements hard. It might just be an allergy but it took me 3 years to find the cause and I’m happy to avoid it that’s for sure.

      • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe there are studies showing it messes with gut bacteria. Seems consistent with what you describe.

        • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          yeah the occasional non-cancer side effects are well known by now but weirdly enough they just can’t seem to find anything conclusive on whether it causes cancer or not…

          At this point I’m willing to accuse the sugar lobby for trying to sabotage this chemical out of the market

        • ribboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not aspartame. The study, it’s mainly one, showed that sucralose and saccharin did just that. But aspartame had no effect.

      • Voli@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get the worst migraines from the heavy concentrated juices that use aspartame instead of sugar. And I mean two to three days of constant head pounding, I stopped drinking the “sugar free” ones and I have not had a migraine ever since.

    • PreachHard@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My gripe is that swapping out sugars for fake ones doesn’t seem healthy long term regardless of any direct impact aspartame itself may have. Just have less sugar imo.

      Edit: didn’t realise how controversial that soft opinion would be lol. Look, drink what you want but I’m going to stick with water unless it’s a treat. I know it’s not healthy for me to scratch the dopamine itch with sugary tasting treats all the time; fake sugar or not. My perspective is less about trying to say, diet soda is bad but that there must be better alternatives to suggest than just sweetener filled copies?

      • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        How do you mean?

        I’ve heard of things like the sensation of sweetness being decoupled from satiation leading to a greater urge for sweetness in compensation, but at least personally that’s not happening to me lol.

        • Rowsdower@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I think what they mean is we shouldn’t encourage people to drink what is essentially candy water. Doesn’t matter if it has sugar or aspartame. It’s still candy

          Replacing an unhealthy habit with a less unhealthy habit is still unhealthy (written as I drink a Dr Pepper zero)

          • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why not though? The health impact of moderate diet soda consumption seems to be pretty negligible.

            • Rowsdower@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Diet sodas still aren’t water, and they are pretty acidic. They eat away at your teeth, and aren’t great at actually hydrating you. It significantly reduces the harm from drinking candy water, but it doesn’t eliminate them

        • PreachHard@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s pretty acidic which sucks for your teeth for one but that wasn’t what I was trying to say

          Yeah I just really mean as a diet as a whole though. If you have an issue with sugar intake then you’re probs drinking way too much sugary drinks. To suggest just swapping out sugars for fake ones I don’t think is best choice to suggest for most people.

          I think there’s probably tons of other issues too just aside from the excess glucose. So fix the diet not the sugar.

          Yeah I agree it’s fine that a most of these chemicals are safe in moderation and well researched. My gripe is the hot swap fix-all attitude that people can take from it.

          • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            That makes sense. I’m coming at this as someone who drinks diet coke because they like it rather than to avoid drinking sugar.

            Amusingly it’s the fact that diet coke is relatively less sweet that makes me like it.

        • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          And even if it’s true, it means you’ll eat the sugar instead of drinking it, and then you’ll be able to ingest less sugar before feeling full, plus you probably get some fibre with it as well which helps a lot.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even if aspartame does cause cancer you get the choice of cancer or diabetes when you drink cola, so whatever. Just don’t drink it.

    • Kingofthezyx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not what this is saying. This is saying the studies saying it IS harmful were real, and the part saying “it’s probably safe in small amounts” was industry-influenced.

      • cobra89@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, this is just saying the safe dosage level was biased by people from the industry being on that particular panel.

        Despite the IARC’s new designation, the Joint FAO-WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), which determines safe doses of food additives, did not change its recommendation for daily intake of aspartame. JECFA still says that consuming 40 milligrams of aspartame per every 1 kilogram of body weight (about 2.2 pounds) per day is acceptable, according to a news release.

        This is just 1 panel that determined the safe dosage level. This does not affect the findings of the study at all which concluded that aspartame is “possibly carcinogenic to humans” but that “We don’t know enough about the possible link between aspartame and cancer, but we can’t ignore that there’s something going on”

        So they haven’t even found a definitive link or even said it’s definitively dangerous. And the 40 milligrams per 1 kilogram of body weight is the same as the recommendation from the FDA.

        Also the thing it is replacing, sugar, IS known to cause cancer, diabetes, and other diseases. So take that as you will.

        • CanadianCorhen@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That last bit is what people always seem to miss.

          Getting hit in the head with a branch is bad for you, but it’s less bad for you than a bullet.

          In the end, you need to compare the two risks, and not decide “a is bad, no need to look at b”

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t much care what one study is saying. We’ve studied this chemical so much and we still have no conclusive proof it’s harmful. At some point you really gotta focus money elsewhere.