No. Aspartame is one of the most studied and tested substances on the planet and they still haven't linked a single problem to it. At least not one that doesn't relate to sweeteners in general. Nothing else has gone under so much scrutiny (Maybe MSG). Seems like a too good to be true situation where people can't accept its actually this good.
Can you provide a source or explain how you came to the conclusion that it is one of the most studied substances on the planet?
Personally I'm not worried about aspartame. I consume it in small amounts and am not overly concerned, but this statement goes beyond the facts I'm aware of.
Speaking of people being afraid of MSG, As far as I'm concerned that's racist. The only reason people are afraid of seaweed extract (MSG) is because some racists person made up "Chinese Food Syndrome". People repeating the lie are affectively passing on something based on racist propaganda. It's also the reason much of the asian food in the bay area doesn't taste nearly as delicious as the real deal in asia. Because the racist person who made up Chinese Food Syndrome lie is still spreading their hatred.
> The only reason people are afraid of seaweed extract (MSG) is because some racists person made up "Chinese Food Syndrome".
Not exactly. I agree the term is racist, and that racist sentiment may way spur disinformation on MSG. But the fear actually began in 1968, during the beginnings of the modern 'health food' movement, with a letter written in the New England Journal of Medicine by a man named Robert Ho Man Kwok describing his supposed symptoms from eating MSG. The body of follow up research showing no such effects is much less interesting to people than the scary story that started it all.
According to this article [0], "Robert Ho Man Kwok" was a fake name. The letter was supposedly a hoax but the journal wanted to publish it even though the author contacted them later and told them it was a hoax.
Well, most Chinese restaurants usually dump MSG into their cooking. Back before Panda Express stopped claiming they used it, they would dump more than one teaspoons of it for a single entree on the fly.
MSG should be used as sparingly as possible (a pinch or less) and there are many kinds for specific ingredients, such as the original one made by Ajinomoto and more specialized ones for meats or vegetables only.
This isn't really about the safe dosage of MSG for human consumption but the prolonged effects from folks whom are sensitive (or have developed a tolerance) to such exposure without even realizing it. I have had non-Asian friends whom have developed an allergy from it when it doesn't overly affect me at all but raises an interesting correlation not causation argument when applied in a broader food and cooking consumption context.
Please link directly to the study (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-011-1968-2) instead of just posting the PR announcement. I'll also note that this is part of the Northern Manhattan Study (http://columbianomas.org/). I'll also note that it's not directly about aspartame but diet sodas in general (so if diet sodas has a consistently higher caffeine, then that could be the reason). I've also noticed this phrase, although the study claims that increased cardiovascular risk on frequent diet soda consumption is still significant despite adjusting to these factors:
Frequent diet soft drink consumption was uniquely associated with white race, former smoking, hypertension, elevated blood sugar, lower HDL, elevated triglycerides, increased waist circumference, BMI, peripheral vascular disease, previous cardiac disease, and the metabolic syndrome. Frequent regular soft drink consumption was uniquely associated with male sex, black race, current smoking, carbohydrate consumption, greater diastolic BP, and lower prevalences of diabetes and hypercholesterolemia.
On the other hand, it was published in 2012 and the study was conducted in America, so almost all non-diet sodas were sweetened with either 100% HFCS or cane sugar/HFCS mix. It's harder to replicate today considering that most non-diet sodas has also added aspartame (or other high-intensity sweeteners) to the sweetener mix.
Intuitively, it would make sense that the introduction of such an artificial and alien chemical into the diet would have some kind of negative effect, for whatever that's worth. I say that as a fairly heavy user of sweeteners.
I don't understand why people are scared of "Alien Chemicals" in food but will take plenty of OTC medication. If we didn't trust anything made in labs people would still be dying at 30 years old.
Also, artificial sweeteners help people who have obesity problems, being obese will reduce your life expectancy by up to 15 years, drinking diet soda hasn't killed anyone.
I think so, this meta study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28938797/ from 2017 seems to suggest that there are some possible negative effects and points out that most studies use animal models. Animal models are not conclusive, so without quality human studies I would say the "jury is still out"
Diet Coke mythology
You can’t discuss diet sodas for very long before someone brings up the old saw the diet sodas cause weight gain. The theory was that the sweetness induces hunger and you eat more actual food to satisfy it.
In 2008 Fowler and Williams[5] published a paper noting a correlation between obesity and diet soda consumption. A correlation, not causation. But in 2009, Chen and Appel [6] monitored 810 adults for 18 months, recording their beverage intake. They found weight gain from sugar sweetened beverages and but no weight gain from artificially sweetened beverages.
Finally, in 2012, Maersk and Belza [7] compared satiety scores for milk, sugar sweetened beverages and artificially sweetened beverages, and found no evidence that artificially sweetened beverages increased appetite or energy intake, concluding that “diet colas had effects similar to water.”
Regarding unfounded rumors that artificially sweetened beverages had some neurological effect, a panel of 10 experts examined all the current literature [8] and concluded:
The data from the extensive investigations into the possibility of neurotoxic effects of aspartame, in general, do not support the hypothesis that aspartame in the human diet will affect nervous system function, learning or behavior. Epidemiological studies on aspartame include several case-control studies and one well-conducted prospective epidemiological study with a large cohort, in which the consumption of aspartame was measured. The studies provide no evidence to support an association between aspartame and cancer in any tissue. The weight of existing evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener.
So aspartame is safe before and after it degrades into the component amino acids, but for the best taste, you should check each package’s expiration date.
Problem is that it's not alone on the market. These new proteinbars that are flooding stores here in Sweden have a careful balance of THREE different sweeteners just to get away with the low sugar content.
They do taste amazing but I'm skeptical to anything unnatural.
This article is at pains to say ‘it’s safe’. Meh. It is absolutely not definitely established to be safe.
Safety aside, I read some research once which indicated artificial sweeteners impact the body’s own insulin response and suppress the feeling of being full. This resonated with me because when I have diet sodas I always feel like eating. Nowadays I stick to water or if I want to treat myself, soda with real sugar.