What's New

Nutrition Consultant Helge Hellberg discusses the Light Brown Apple Moth, the victory against the spray campaign, and how the organic industry benefits.


Click HERE to read the full San Francisco magazine article.

Featured Products

Eating For Health - Print Edition
Eating For Health - Print Edition
$18.95
Add to Cart
Aspartame Research: Questions Remain | Print |
by Jodi Friedlander, M.S. and Edward Bauman, M.Ed, Ph.D.

Aspartame has recently been in the news and the reports have been conflicting. This isn’t so surprising. Differing conclusions are often reached when research is done on food additives. If researchers want their studies to show no harmful effects, they can use healthy subjects and a limited dosing of the substance and stop the project before adverse effects occur. When highly sensitive people – such as children, the chemically sensitive, and the elderly – are subjected to larger quantities, however, the results can be very damaging. These are the typical users, but they are not the typical test subjects.

Such bias is common on the testing of food-like chemicals. Funders have a great deal to gain with positive tests and so much to lose that they may manipulate outcomes to their liking. Typically in these studies, animals are used to ascertain an LD50 (lethal dose). These animals may or may not be appropriate surrogates for human subjects, however. When subsequent human testing is conducted, biochemical individuality plays a significant role. Again, the people at greatest risk of an adverse reaction to any food, chemical, or drug are the very young, the chronically ill, those on medication, and the elderly. Research on aspartame did not look at its effect on this set of people. In the case of aspartame, the favorable studies utilized small numbers of subjects and did not control for their diet, lifestyle, age, or health status. Consequently, while manufacturers and distributors hailed the FDA approval of Aspartame as a sign of its safety, several thousand complaints per year are reported from aspartame ingestion.

Are these problems due to the compound itself, the user, or the amount ingested? We believe the answer is “all of the above.” Simple common sense should steer us toward natural compounds and away from synthetics that are foreign to nature and our bodies. Our advice, then, is that less or no exposure to aspartame, a potentially addictive and stimulating compound, is best (Bauman, 2007).


Recent aspartame (Equal®, NutraSweet®) studies (2006) had equivocal findings:

  1. Aspartame caused cancer in laboratory rats and, therefore, may cause cancer in humans; yet
  2. Analysis of long-term aspartame use (1981-present) has shown no increases in cancer.

A review of the scientific literature paints a far more complex picture, as aspartame is one of the most studied food additives ever. It is true that most of these studies show that it’s safe to use in moderate doses for most people. However, most of these studies were done using very few subjects over very short periods of time. We simply don’t know what consequences will occur with regular use over time. What is certain is that we have shown ourselves to be willing guinea pigs and are even willing to pay for that dubious privilege every time we purchase an aspartame-sweetened product.

The controversy over aspartame’s cancer-causing ability may only be serving to deflect attention from the main problem. Aspartame has been shown to be a neurotoxin – meaning that it changes brain chemicals. One study found that high aspartame levels affect cellular enzyme activity, interfering with antioxidant activity and cellular energy. And while most studies have focused on aspartame alone, one that tested aspartame with non-nutritive additives like commonly used food-coloring agents, in concentrations consistent with daily intake, found a cumulative effect that increased cellular toxicity to significant levels (Lau et al., 2006).

No chemicals in our bodies are isolated. Compounds such as aspartame will interact with food, alcohol, medicines, and environmental toxins in unique and unpredictable ways. In the interest of minimizing volatile chemical reactions in our bodies, we should seriously consider avoiding aspartame.


References:

LD Stegink, “The aspartame story: a model for the clinical testing of a food additive”,

Am J Clin Nutr 1987;46:204-15.

BJ Rolls, “Effects of intense sweeteners on hunger, food intake, and body weight: a review”,

Am J Clin Nutr Apr 1991;53:872-878.

Marilyn Marchione, AP Medical Writer, “Federal Study Rejects Aspartame Risks”,

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060405/ap_on_he_me/diet_aspartame_3 (expired)

Melanie Warner, “The Lowdown on Sweet?”, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/12/business/yourmoney/12sweet.htm

K H Schulpis, I Papassotiriou, T Parthimos, T Tsakiris, S Tsakiris, “The effect of L-cysteine and glutathione on inhibition of Na+, K+-ATPase activity by aspartame metabolites in human erythrocyte membrane”, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 14 December 2005; doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602355

Karen Lau, W. Graham McLean, Dominic P. Williams, and C. Vyvyan Howard
”Synergistic Interactions between Commonly Used Food Additives in a Developmental Neurotoxicity Test”. Toxicol. Sci., March 2006; 90:178 - 187.
 
[ Back ]