Media Home
UN Web TV
UN Audiovisual Library
UN PhotoWHO / ASPARTAME
Download
There is no media available to download.
Share
STORY: WHO / ASPARTAME
TRT: 7:10
SOURCE: WHO / IARC
RESTRICTIONS: UNDER EMBARGO TILL 13 JULY 18:30 EST
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH / NATS
DATELINE: 12 JULY 2023, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
1.Wide shot, Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan at the studio
2.SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan, Deputy Branch Head of the Evidence Synthesis and Classification Branch and Head of the IARC Monographs programme:
“Every five years, we convene a group of independent experts who come together to look at a list of agents that have been nominated by the general public, by the scientific community and the public health communities to look at agents that may or may not pose a carcinogenic hazard. So this group met last in 2019, and they reviewed all of the existing evidence for aspartame, which had never been evaluated previously by the monographs. And they concluded that aspartame should be evaluated with high priority in the next five years on the basis of new evidence from studies of cancer in experimental animals and new epidemiological studies of human cancer.”
3. Med shot, Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan at the studio
4. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan, Deputy Branch Head of the Evidence Synthesis and Classification Branch and Head of the IARC Monographs programme:
“There were a number of cancer findings that were emerging from this set of studies, and most of them were conducted since the year 2005, but all the way up until 2022. And the evidence was strongest for a carcinogenic effect for a type of liver cancer called hepatocellular carcinoma. There were some sporadic positive findings for other cancer sites like breast, obesity related cancers and some forms of leukaemia. However, those findings were not as consistent as the findings for this type of liver cancer.”
5. Wide shot, Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan at the studio
6. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan, Deputy Branch Head of the Evidence Synthesis and Classification Branch and Head of the IARC Monographs programme:
“In our view, this group to be classification for aspartame with limited evidence for hepatocellular carcinoma in humans and limited evidence for cancer in experimental animals and limited mechanistic evidence strongly suggests that we need additional research to better understand whether aspartame poses a carcinogenic hazard. There are a number of different research avenues that could be pursued, and some of the most interesting ones are about possible mechanisms of carcinogenesis that might be a bit unique to artificial sweeteners and don't involve traditional modes of action.”
7. Wide shot, Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan at the studio
8. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan, Deputy Branch Head of the Evidence Synthesis and Classification Branch and Head of the IARC Monographs programme:
“IARC Monographs Working Group concluded that there was in fact limited evidence even for this form of liver cancer hepatocellular carcinoma. There were positive findings in three separate studies. These were the only available studies that looked at liver cancer, but the studies had some methodological limitations that prevented drawing a very firm conclusion that indeed they demonstrated carcinogenicity and so the working group concluded that the evidence was limited. Now, this means that the strength of evidence is not as strong as one would want in order to make a firm recommendation about, yes, aspartame does cause cancer. So instead the conclusion was possibly carcinogenic. And we don't really give advice to people on how to interpret that evidence. This is why it was so important for us to partner with JECFA for the evaluation so that they could conduct the risk assessment.”
9.Wide shot, Dr Francesco Branca at the studio
10. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Francesco Branca, Director Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, WHO:
“The Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives, which is the scientific advisory body JECFA that is developing recommendations for the Codex Committee on Food Additives, looked at the whole risk assessment procedure. So it went all the way from the hazard identification, considering the exposure in real life to the compound and then concluded on whether consumption of aspartame at certain levels of consumption is a risk for health, not just for cancer, but for other health outcomes, particularly non-communicable diseases outcomes.”
10. Wide shot, Dr Francesco Branca at the studio
11. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Francesco Branca, Director Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, WHO:
“So at the conclusion of the JECFA risk assessment, there was no change of the acceptable daily intake. This is because the science, although was indicating some element of concerns, was not conclusive to indicate that these levels should be reduced.”
12. Wide shot, Dr Francesco Branca at the studio
13. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Francesco Branca, Director Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, WHO:
“So occasional consumption of aspartame is most probably not going to be associated to health risk for most individuals. We are aware that a high consumers are still not exceeding the acceptable daily intake. Children may be a more of a concern, but occasional consumers should not be concerned about consuming some products, whether it's drinks or chewing gums or other products containing this sweetener.”
14. Wide shot, Dr Francesco Branca at the studio
15. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Francesco Branca, Director Department of Nutrition and Food Safety, WHO:
“Our advice is that products containing sweeteners as well as products containing sugar should be moderated. And in children, particularly, the exposure to early exposure to the sweet taste is going to track in adulthood. And I think it's important to be accustomed to less intense sweet taste, this is in general benefit beneficial for for healthy diets. So don't perhaps exceed those consumption. Don't use sodas as a main source of fluids. Just use just ordinary water on the table.”
16. Wide shot, Dr Federica Madia at the studio
17. SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Federica Madia, Senior toxicologist at the IARC Monographs programme and responsible officer of the Monograph 134:
“For the evaluation of Hazard, the program, we consider ten key characteristics of carcinogens that are properties... these are the properties of carcinogens. We evaluate the evidence under all these properties, whether an agent cause oxidative stress, genotoxicity, damage to DNA, chronic inflammation. And we identified a link... we identified evidence in experimental system. So either in vivo or in vitro experiments of oxidative stress, there were certain biomarkers altered, including lipid peroxidation that could lead to damage to protein or DNA.”
18. Wide shot, Dr Federica Madia at the studio
19.SOUNDBITE (English) Dr Federica Madia, Senior toxicologist at the IARC Monographs programme and responsible officer of the Monograph 134:
“The evidence is still limited as some of the needs... the amount of data is not so big, and some of the protocols need further refinement and the design of the study in need of better quality.”
20. Wide shot, Dr Federica Madia at the studio
Two expert bodies have recently assessed the non-sugar sweetener aspartame. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has made an assessment of data on any potential carcinogenic effect of aspartame (hazard identification). The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) has updated its risk assessment of aspartame.
Dr Mary Schubauer-Berigan is the Deputy Branch Head of the Evidence Synthesis and Classification Branch and Head of the IARC Monographs programme.
She said, “Every five years, we convene a group of independent experts who come together to look at a list of agents that have been nominated by the general public, by the scientific community and the public health communities to look at agents that may or may not pose a carcinogenic hazard.”
Dr Schubauer-Berigan continued, “this group met last in 2019, and they reviewed all of the existing evidence for aspartame, which had never been evaluated previously by the monographs. And they concluded that aspartame should be evaluated with high priority in the next five years on the basis of new evidence from studies of cancer in experimental animals and new epidemiological studies of human cancer.”
She also said, “There were a number of cancer findings that were emerging from this set of studies, and most of them were conducted since the year 2005, but all the way up until 2022. And the evidence was strongest for a carcinogenic effect for a type of liver cancer called hepatocellular carcinoma.”
Dr Schubauer-Berigan explained, “There were some sporadic positive findings for other cancer sites like breast, obesity related cancers and some forms of leukaemia. However, those findings were not as consistent as the findings for this type of liver cancer.”
She also said, “In our view, this group to be classification for aspartame with limited evidence for hepatocellular carcinoma in humans and limited evidence for cancer in experimental animals and limited mechanistic evidence strongly suggests that we need additional research to better understand whether aspartame poses a carcinogenic hazard.”
She added, “There are a number of different research avenues that could be pursued, and some of the most interesting ones are about possible mechanisms of carcinogenesis that might be a bit unique to artificial sweeteners and don't involve traditional modes of action.”
Dr Schubauer-Berigan said, “IARC Monographs Working Group concluded that there was in fact limited evidence even for this form of liver cancer hepatocellular carcinoma. There were positive findings in three separate studies. These were the only available studies that looked at liver cancer, but the studies had some methodological limitations that prevented drawing a very firm conclusion that indeed they demonstrated carcinogenicity and so the working group concluded that the evidence was limited.”
She further explained, “Now, this means that the strength of evidence is not as strong as one would want in order to make a firm recommendation about, yes, aspartame does cause cancer. So instead the conclusion was possibly carcinogenic. And we don't really give advice to people on how to interpret that evidence. This is why it was so important for us to partner with JECFA for the evaluation so that they could conduct the risk assessment.”
WHO’s Dr Francesco Branca said, “The Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives, which is the scientific advisory body JECFA that is developing recommendations for the Codex Committee on Food Additives, looked at the whole risk assessment procedure.”
He continued, “it went all the way from the hazard identification, considering the exposure in real life to the compound and then concluded on whether consumption of aspartame at certain levels of consumption is a risk for health, not just for cancer, but for other health outcomes, particularly non-communicable diseases outcomes.”
Dr Branca said, “at the conclusion of the JECFA risk assessment, there was no change of the acceptable daily intake. This is because the science, although was indicating some element of concerns, was not conclusive to indicate that these levels should be reduced.”
He also said, “So occasional consumption of aspartame is most probably not going to be associated to health risk for most individuals. We are aware that a high consumers are still not exceeding the acceptable daily intake. Children may be a more of a concern, but occasional consumers should not be concerned about consuming some products, whether it's drinks or chewing gums or other products containing this sweetener.”
“Our advice is that products containing sweeteners as well as products containing sugar should be moderated,” the WHO expert said.
He added, “in children, particularly, the exposure to early exposure to the sweet taste is going to track in adulthood. And I think it's important to be accustomed to less intense sweet taste, this is in general benefit beneficial for for healthy diets. So don't perhaps exceed those consumption. Don't use sodas as a main source of fluids. Just use just ordinary water on the table.”
Federica Madia is a senior toxicologist at the IARC Monographs programme and responsible officer of the Monograph 134.
She said, “For the evaluation of Hazard, the program, we consider ten key characteristics of carcinogens that are properties... these are the properties of carcinogens. We evaluate the evidence under all these properties, whether an agent cause oxidative stress, genotoxicity, damage to DNA, chronic inflammation. And we identified a link... we identified evidence in experimental system. So either in vivo or in vitro experiments of oxidative stress, there were certain biomarkers altered, including lipid peroxidation that could lead to damage to protein or DNA.”
Dr Madia also said, “The evidence is still limited as some of the needs... the amount of data is not so big, and some of the protocols need further refinement and the design of the study in need of better quality.”
