INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
LONDON: One of the world's most common artificial sweeteners is set to be declared a possible carcinogen next month by a leading global
health body, according to two sources with knowledge of the process, pitting it against the food industry and regulators.Aspartame, used in
products from Coca-Cola diet sodas to Mars' Extra chewing gum and some Snapple drinks, will be listed in July as "possibly carcinogenic to
humans" for the first time by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization's (WHO) cancer research
arm, the sources said.The IARC ruling, finalised earlier this month after a meeting of the group's external experts, is intended to assess
whether something is a potential hazard or not, based on all the published evidence.It does not take into account how much of a product a
person can safely consume
This advice for individuals comes from a separate WHO expert committee on food additives, known as JECFA (the Joint WHO and Food and
Agriculture Organization's Expert Committee on Food Additives), alongside determinations from national regulators.However, similar IARC
rulings in the past for different substances have raised concerns among consumers about their use, led to lawsuits, and pressured
manufacturers to recreate recipes and swap to alternatives
That has led to criticism that the IARC's assessments can be confusing to the public.JECFA, the WHO committee on additives, is also
reviewing aspartame use this year
July 14.Since 1981, JECFA has said aspartame is safe to consume within accepted daily limits
Its view has been widely shared by national regulators, including in the United States and Europe.An IARC spokesperson said both the IARC
and JECFA committees' findings were confidential until July, but added they were "complementary", with IARC's conclusion representing "the
first fundamental step to understand carcinogenicity"
The additives committee "conducts risk assessment, which determines the probability of a specific type of harm (e.g., cancer) to occur under
certain conditions and levels of exposure."However, industry and regulators fear that holding both processes at around the same time could
be confusing, according to letters from U.S
and Japanese regulators seen by Reuters."We kindly ask both bodies to coordinate their efforts in reviewing aspartame to avoid any confusion
or concerns among the public," Nozomi Tomita, an official from Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, wrote in a letter dated March
27 to WHO's deputy director general, Zsuzsanna Jakab.The letter also called for the conclusions of both bodies to be released on the same
The Japanese mission in Geneva, where the WHO is based, did not respond to a request for comment.DEBATE The IARC's rulings can have huge
In 2015, its committee concluded that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic"
Years later, even as other bodies like the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) contested this, companies were still feeling the effects of
court verdicts that awarded damages to customers blaming their cancers on use of its glyphosate-based weedkillers.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 using mobile phones as
"possibly cancer-causing", similar to aspartame."IARC is not a food safety body and their review of aspartame is not scientifically
comprehensive and is based heavily on widely discredited research," Frances Hunt-Wood, the secretary general of the International Sweeteners
Association (ISA), said.The body, whose members include Mars Wrigley, a Coca-Cola unit and Cargill, said it had "serious concerns with the
IARC review, which may mislead consumers".The International Council of Beverages Associations' executive director Kate Loatman said public
health authorities should be "deeply concerned" by the "leaked opinion", and also warned it "could needlessly mislead consumers into
consuming more sugar rather than choosing safe no-and low-sugar options." Aspartame has been extensively studied for years
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.Aspartame is authorised for use globally by regulators who have reviewed all the available evidence, and major food and beverage makers
have for decades defended their use of the ingredient
The IARC said it had assessed 1,300 studies in its June review.Recent recipe tweaks by soft drinks giant Pepsico demonstrate the struggle
the industry has when it comes to balancing taste preferences with health concerns
Pepsico removed aspartame from sodas in 2015, bringing it back a year later, only to remove it again in 2020.Listing aspartame as a possible
carcinogen is intended to motivate more research, said the sources close to the IARC, which will help agencies, consumers and manufacturers
draw firmer conclusions.But it will also likely ignite debate once again over the IARC's role, as well as the safety of sweeteners more
Last month, the WHO published guidelines advising consumers not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control
The guidelines caused a furore in the food industry, which argues they can be helpful for consumers wanting to reduce the amount of sugar in
