this post was submitted on 17 Jul 2023
655 points (96.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43831 readers
928 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Artificial sweeteners
Increasingly, yes. It's shaping to be (ironically) the sugar of the 21st century, where sugar was touted as healthy in the 50s despite the effects on diabetes and obesity that we're still seeing now.
is a bit of an understatement, to say the least
is a bit of an understatement, to say the least
What about natural sweeteners like Stevia? Has anything come out about it? I know it has weird effects like it can cause indigestion and other things, but I haven't personally heard anything about it actually being bad for you (though I have not looked very far).
Yep. The WHO just declared aspartame (diet Coke sweetener) as a carcinogen.
"Possible carcinogen"
The IARC classified this as a possible carcinogen in their category 2b based on limited evidence of a particular cancer in humans โ hepatocellular carcinoma, which is a type of liver cancer. The strength-of-evidence classification in Group 2B is the third highest level out of 4 levels, and it is generally used either when there is limited, but not convincing, evidence for cancer in humans or convincing evidence for cancer in experimental animals, but not both. This classification is primarily intended to inform researchers to encourage further research of aspartame, and it does not make any assertion about the relative risk associated with typical exposure levels. It rather determines whether the substance could be carcinogenic at any dose โ even if the required dose far exceeds typical exposure.
Notably, JEFCA, the group responsible for researching and making recommendations on food additives, reviewed the same evidence as the WHO and concluded that the data evaluated indicated no sufficient reason to change the previously established acceptable daily intake (ADI) of 0โ40 mg/kg body weight for aspartame. The committee therefore reaffirmed that it is safe for a person to consume within this limit per day. For example, with a can of diet soft drink containing 200 or 300 mg of aspartame, an adult weighing 70kg would need to consume more than 9โ14 cans per day to exceed the acceptable daily intake, assuming no other intake from other food sources.
https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released