145
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by YellowtoOrange@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Aspartame is also linked in some studies to weight gain, GI disorders, mental health issues and more:

According to some studies, aspartame and other artificial sweeteners can lead to weight gain instead of weight loss 12. Aspartame has been linked to increased appetite, diabetes, metabolic derangement and obesity-related diseases 2.

One study showed that aspartame causes greater weight gain than a diet with the same calorie intake but no aspartame 1. Another study found that even acceptable daily intakes of aspartame might make you hungrier and lead to weight gain 3.

...some research suggests an association between aspartame intake and metabolic damage to the central nervous system (CNS), such as changes in enzyme and neurotransmitter activities 2. Aspartame acts as a chemical stressor by elevating plasma cortisol levels and causing the production of excess free radicals. High cortisol levels and excess free radicals may increase the brain’s vulnerability to oxidative stress which may have adverse effects on neurobehavioral health 3.

There is also some evidence that high-aspartame consumption may lead to weaker spatial orientation, irritability, depression, and other neurobehavioral conditions 14. However, these studies are limited in scope and further research is needed to determine the long-term effects of aspartame on human health.

Worth researching more, especially if you eat/drink anything with this stuff - and it's in a lot of food products.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] xthedeerlordx@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If you want to ignore the vast majority of safety research about artificial sweeteners, then sure.... From this very article you posted:

"“IARC is not a food safety body”

The IARC’s decisions have also faced criticism for sparking needless alarm over hard-to-avoid substances or situations. It has previously put working overnight and consuming red meat into its “probably cancer-causing” class, and classifying the use of mobile phones as “possibly cancer-causing”, similar to aspartame.

“IARC is not a food safety body. The World Health Organization’s Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) is currently conducting a comprehensive food safety review of aspartame and no conclusions can be drawn until both reports are published,” Secretary General of the International Sweeteners Association, Frances Hunt-Wood, said in their press release.

According to the ISA, aspartame is one of the most thoroughly researched ingredients in history, with over 90 food safety agencies across the globe declaring it is safe, including the EFSA.

The International Council of Beverages Association (ICBA) shares a similar position, arguing that aspartame has proven to be a safe tool to reduce calories and sugars in diets.

“The best available evidence from large population studies shows that low and no-calorie sweeteners as a replacement strategy for added sugars is associated with reductions in important public health outcomes such as obesity, cardiovascular disease and death,” John Sievenpiper, Professor in the Department of Medicine at the University of Toronto, told on behalf of the ICBA in their press release.

Aspartame has been extensively studied for years. Last year, an observational study in France among 100,000 adults showed that people who consumed larger amounts of artificial sweeteners – including aspartame – had a slightly higher cancer risk.

It followed a study from the Ramazzini Institute in Italy in the early 2000s, which reported that some cancers in mice and rats were linked to aspartame.

However, the first study could not prove that aspartame caused the increased cancer risk, and questions have been raised about the methodology of the second study, including by EFSA, which assessed it."

Observational studies do not equate to causation

[-] Cruxifux@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

I’m convinced that sugar companies pump bullshit about other sweeteners to sell more sugar in America.

Like we already have sugar in fucking everything, you don’t need to ALSO propagandize the stupidest and most propagandized people in the first world.

[-] giraffebiscuit@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm so happy that I'm able to make a lot of things that my family eats from scratch. Bread does not need sugar/HFCS in it to be tasty! Really the only things I buy pre made now is pasta (I'm learning how to make spaghetti noodles, but elbow noodles remain elusive lol).

[-] Cruxifux@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, the bread one annoys me. The homemade bread me and my dad make tastes 100 times better that store bought, and we don’t put sugar in it.

It’s just a fucking scam man. I’m glad I live in Canada where it’s slightly better, but not by much.

You can see why Americans struggle so hard with weight issues though.

[-] EnglishMobster@kbin.social -2 points 1 year ago

We actually don't have much in the way of sugar. Usually high fructose corn syrup is the substitute in the US, since the government subsidizes corn production. High fructose corn syrup (obviously) comes from corn, so it's cheaper than sugar due to those government corn subsidies - meaning that not a lot of American food has sugar in it.

[-] Cruxifux@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

HFCS and sugar are almost identical, to the point where it’s not worth distinguishing from a nutritious standpoint, or in the context of what I’m trying to say here.

[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Um. Just to point a couple of things here:

"According to ISA, aspartame is one of the most-thoroughly researched ingredients in history..."

ISA is the International Sweeteners Association. I hope that speaks for itself?

And that the International Council of Beverages Association would defend it is similarly unsurprising, as they have a vested interest.

You are minimizing a WHO body with industry shill talking points and people are upvoting it because it sounds convincing.

[-] varzaman@lemmy.one 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

While you are pointing out correct things, you are missing the forest for the trees.

Here is a better article: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/whos-cancer-research-agency-say-aspartame-sweetener-possible-carcinogen-sources-2023-06-29/

The IARC makes its carcinogenic categorizations mutually exclusive from dosing. If a substance is known to be carcinogenic at unrealistic amounts, it will still be labeled as carcinogenic. They don't' bring the human dosing element into play.

There is another WHO organization called the JEFCA that does actual food safety, with the context of a human being.

[-] Bloonface@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

You've literally quoted two industry bodies who have a vested interest in keeping aspartame on the market.

this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2023
145 points (84.4% liked)

World News

38691 readers
2704 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS