IARC

• They have recommended the acceptable daily intake be 0 to 40mg per kilo of body weight, as we currently have in Australia.
• The hazard rating means it’s an agent that is capable of causing cancer; a risk measures the likelihood it could cause cancer.

Firstly, what is aspartame?

• It’s used in a variety of products including carbonated drinks such as Coke Zero, Diet Coke, Pepsi Max and some home brand offerings.
• You can identify aspartame in drinks and foods by looking for additive number 951.
• In Australia the acceptable daily intake is 40mg per kilo of body weight per day, which is about 60 sachets.

What evidence have they used to come to this conclusion?

• They found there was some limited evidence in human studies linking aspartame and cancer (specifically liver cancer) and limited evidence from animal studies as well.
• They also considered the biological mechanism studies which showed how cancer may develop from the consumption of aspartame.
• Usually these are lab-based studies which show exactly how exposure to the agent may lead to a cancer.
• In this case they found there was limited evidence for how aspartame might cause cancer.

What does each grouping mean?

• There are 126 agents in this group, including tobacco smoking, alcohol, processed meat, radiation and ionising radiation.
• There are 95 agents in this group, including red meat, DDT insecticide and night shift work.
• There are now 323 agents in this group, including aloe vera (whole leaf extract), ginkgo biloba and lead.

So do I have to give up my diet soft drink habit?

• For a 70kg person you would need to consume about 14 cans (over 5 litres) of soft drink sweetened with aspartame a day to reach the acceptable daily intake.
• But we need to remember there may also be aspartame added in other foods consumed.
• But overall, from this evidence, drinking the occasional or even daily can of a diet drink is safe and probably not a cancer risk.

• Aspartame is about 200 times sweeter than sugar and is one of the most commonly used artificial sweeteners.
• It’s used particularly in “low calorie” or “diet” foods and beverages, but is contained in a wide variety of products including drinks, ice creams, chewing gums, confectionery, sauces and snacks.
• While reports like these can understandably be worrying, there’s no reason to panic at this stage.

What does ‘possibly carcinogenic’ actually mean?

• This is important as new evidence can emerge, especially with the development of different methods to assess the health effects of additives.
• This year, aspartame has been reevaluated by two WHO agencies: the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA).
• In its reports (called monographs), it reviews all available evidence and classifies hazards into one of four categories:
• It shares this category with aloe vera leaves, electromagnetic radiation, the heart drug digoxin and engine exhaust fumes, among many other things.
• For all of these hazards, there is some limited data that suggests they might cause cancer – but nothing convincing.
• These categories can be confusing, because they refer only to the strength of the evidence that something can cause cancer, not the degree of risk.

The evidence so far

• This review didn’t find any new evidence that aspartame causes cancer and confirmed previous reviews by other regulators.
• One compound that was of particular interest was methanol, which is formed in the gut when aspartame is broken down and converted into formaldehyde by the human body.
• However, the amount that can form after the consumption of aspartame is much lower than what the body produces naturally.

• Even IARC agrees it is not the appropriate authority to undertake risk assessment based on actual consumption and that it 'does not make health recommendations.'
• We remain confident in the safety of aspartame given the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and positive safety determinations by food safety authorities in more than 90 countries around the world.
• Contrary to the leaked IARC opinion, an April 2022 systematic review published by IARC's parent body the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded there was "no significant association" between higher consumption of low- and no-calorie sweeteners (measured through beverage consumption) and cancer mortality, nor any type of cancer.
• IARC had committed to conduct its review in "close collaboration" with the more comprehensive WHO and FAO joint review and to release results of both reviews simultaneously on July 14.

• Even IARC agrees it is not the appropriate authority to undertake risk assessment based on actual consumption and that it 'does not make health recommendations.'
• We remain confident in the safety of aspartame given the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and positive safety determinations by food safety authorities in more than 90 countries around the world.
• Contrary to the leaked IARC opinion, an April 2022 systematic review published by IARC's parent body the World Health Organization (WHO) concluded there was "no significant association" between higher consumption of low- and no-calorie sweeteners (measured through beverage consumption) and cancer mortality, nor any type of cancer.
• IARC had committed to conduct its review in "close collaboration" with the more comprehensive WHO and FAO joint review and to release results of both reviews simultaneously on July 14.