Aspartame may cause cancer, global health body says

The seemingly opposing announcements by IARC and the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives — separate agencies within the United Nation’s health authority — is certain to intensify questions about the safety of aspartame, which is used in everything from Diet Coke and toothpaste to low-calorie fruit yogurts and cough drops.

More than 90 countries have approved aspartame’s use, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has reviewed its safety five times since it was approved for consumption in 1981. Yet concerns have persisted about its potential cancer risk.

What’s in your food? Find the artificial sweeteners in these sugar-free grocery items.

Already, governmental agencies and the food industry are pushing back.

The FDA said in a statement that it disagrees with IARC’s conclusion that aspartame is a possible carcinogen to humans, citing shortcomings in the studies on which IARC relied. It said aspartame is one of the most studied food additives in the human food supply.

“Some consumers may rely on products with aspartame and other sweeteners to help reduce their sugar consumption. We recognize that navigating different information from health organizations is challenging,” the FDA statement said.

For the world’s nearly 540 million people living with diabetes, IARC’s announcement is “misleading, inaccurate and fearmongering,” said Robert Rankin, president of the Calorie Control Council, an industry association representing the low- and reduced-calorie food and beverage industry.

Some critics ridiculed IARC in advance of this week’s expected announcement, noting that it has in the past labeled working at night, aloe vera and eating processed meat as cancer-causing.

Technically, IARC and JECFA’s assessments aren’t in conflict because the agencies have different jobs. IARC determines whether something has the potential to cause cancer, whereas JECFA judges whether it poses a real risk to humans. IARC has determined that aspartame may cause cancer, but JECFA has said there’s no proof it harms humans if used as directed.