It uncovered eight WHO panelists involved with assessing safe levels of aspartame consumption who are beverage industry consultants who currently or previously worked with the alleged Coke front group, International Life Sciences Institute (Ilsi).

Their involvement in developing intake guidelines represents “an obvious conflict of interest”, said Gary Ruskin, US Right-To-Know’s executive director. “Because of this conflict of interest, [the daily intake] conclusions about aspartame are not credible, and the public should not rely on them,” he added.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    181
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’ve studied this chemical literally more than any other food additive and there’s still nothing definitive. Also mice are not a good stand-in for humans. They are really only used for acute toxicity and such.

    • Tb0n3@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      But the mice genetically predisposed to getting tumors got tumors. What more proof do you need?

    • Mawks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I honestly have no clue on the studies but I can’t drink anything with aspartame in it at all, even a single sip bloats me and screws up my bowel movements hard. It might just be an allergy but it took me 3 years to find the cause and I’m happy to avoid it that’s for sure.

      • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        I believe there are studies showing it messes with gut bacteria. Seems consistent with what you describe.

        • Neshura@bookwormstory.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          yeah the occasional non-cancer side effects are well known by now but weirdly enough they just can’t seem to find anything conclusive on whether it causes cancer or not…

          At this point I’m willing to accuse the sugar lobby for trying to sabotage this chemical out of the market

        • ribboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not aspartame. The study, it’s mainly one, showed that sucralose and saccharin did just that. But aspartame had no effect.

      • Voli@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get the worst migraines from the heavy concentrated juices that use aspartame instead of sugar. And I mean two to three days of constant head pounding, I stopped drinking the “sugar free” ones and I have not had a migraine ever since.

    • Mongostein@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Even if aspartame does cause cancer you get the choice of cancer or diabetes when you drink cola, so whatever. Just don’t drink it.

    • PreachHard@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      My gripe is that swapping out sugars for fake ones doesn’t seem healthy long term regardless of any direct impact aspartame itself may have. Just have less sugar imo.

      Edit: didn’t realise how controversial that soft opinion would be lol. Look, drink what you want but I’m going to stick with water unless it’s a treat. I know it’s not healthy for me to scratch the dopamine itch with sugary tasting treats all the time; fake sugar or not. My perspective is less about trying to say, diet soda is bad but that there must be better alternatives to suggest than just sweetener filled copies?

    • Kingofthezyx@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not what this is saying. This is saying the studies saying it IS harmful were real, and the part saying “it’s probably safe in small amounts” was industry-influenced.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t much care what one study is saying. We’ve studied this chemical so much and we still have no conclusive proof it’s harmful. At some point you really gotta focus money elsewhere.