Aspartame

[Sugarcoated]

I don't want to cause alarm to anyone but its come to my attention that WHO is saying its carcogenic. I've been dubious over it for awhile but always listened to my diabetes nurse/dietitian.
Its in alot of foid anyway from cakes to ready made meals - all of which being diabetic most of us avoid.
But i do drink coke when out & i eat protein puddings to help build up my low protein & also they're low in carbs & great for something sweet.
How do you all feel about this news that's suddenly come to light?

 

[Lucyr]

I don't want to cause alarm to anyone but its come to my attention that WHO is saying its carcogenic

Possibly carcinogenic. Big difference.

 

[Catbanj]

I read that the classification they are giving means it is less carcinogenic than red meat. Aspartame is possibly carcinogenic whereas red meat is probably. It doesn't take account of the large amounts you'd need to have over a long period to have an impact.

I'm going to start reading labels a bit more and if there is a choice, reduce aspartame.

 

[Thebearcametoo]

It’s a possible cancer risk but the emphasis is on possible. Red meat is a cancer risk. As is alcohol. I wouldn’t change my aspartame intake based off the headlines.

 

[Sally71]

If you read all the scares about which foods might be bad for you, you’d have nothing left to eat. I’m not going to worry about it. Everything in moderation 🙂

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

This thread has some reassuring clarification on the detail behind the headline I think.

https://forum.diabetes.org.uk/board...lared-potential-carcinogen-next-month.107059/

Including @mikeyB ’s summary post

“The IARC has classified aspartame at the lowest level of their list of carcinogens. Essentially, their research shows that if you drink 12 or more cans of, say, Diet Coke per day you have 1.1% greater chance of getting cancer.”

 

[Deb_l]

If you read all the scares about which foods might be bad for you, you’d have nothing left to eat. I’m not going to worry about it. Everything in moderation 🙂

This ^^

I think this new classification has been a long time coming but the WHO do caution that aspartame has to be consumed in large amounts for it to be a concern. However, I don’t think they have identified what they consider to be a large amount.

 

[Martin.A]

This ^^

I think this new classification has been a long time coming but the WHO do caution that aspartame has to be consumed in large amounts for it to be a concern. However, I don’t think they have identified what they consider to be a large amount.

I read that the "large amount" is equivalent to drinking between 12 and 36 cans of diet drink, depending on the concentration, PER DAY. Aren't our bodies full of microplastics and forever chemicals anyway?

 

[raaeft1]

Is stevia better than Aspartame

 

[indio02]

How do you all feel about this news that's suddenly come to light?

The cancer concerns around artificial sweeteners isn't new its just that Big Food like Big Tabacco in the early part of the 20th century has very deep pockets.

 

[indio02]

WHO do caution that aspartame has to be consumed in large amounts for it to be a concern.

I think it's somewhat more naunced than that and that the real problem is probably the long term mico-dosing.

 

[Leadinglights]

Is stevia better than Aspartame

Stevia is a natural sweetener obtained from a shrub called Stevia rebaudiana. It is generally found on the continent of South America. It is 200–400 times sweeter than sucrose and it is a non-caloric sweetener. Hence, it replaces sugar, corn syrup with high fructose, and other artificial sweeteners.
That doesn't mean to say it is better for you than other sweeteners.
There are many other 'natural' substances that are not good for you.
Whether you can taste or get an aftertaste from sweeteners is often genetic.
I personally don't with aspartame but do with Stevia or some other sweeteners.

 

[rebrascora]

I bought pretty much every sweetener on the market in the first year since diagnosis and I haven't found one that works well for me, so mostly I just don't bother. These claims of being 100x sweeter than sugar etc just seem ludicrous to me as many of them I don't find very sweet at all and have a horrid aftertaste, but I appreciate that it is individual. I am coming to the conclusion that perhaps a very small amount of real sugar may be better than some of these highly manufactured "chemicals". Of course that is easier for me as a Type 1 with Insulin at my disposal.
I do occasionally drink diet cola and flavoured waters which of course are also sweetened with artificial chemicals, but when I have them, I try to have just a small amount in a glass and then topped up with water. Even, in a pub, I will have a small diet coke in a pint glass, topped up with water, to reduce how much of them I drink.

 

[Deb_l]

I read that the "large amount" is equivalent to drinking between 12 and 36 cans of diet drink, depending on the concentration, PER DAY. Aren't our bodies full of microplastics and forever chemicals anyway?

I’ve not paid much attention to the quantities quoted but that’s not actually all that much. It would be for me, I don’t drink any fizzy pop but I have a friend who can easily consume 2 litres of diet or full sugar coke per day. Yep, she’s not very healthy sadly

 

[Sally71]

2 litres is still only 6 standard sized cans, so nowhere near that limit. Not that it’s good of course! I drink too much Diet Coke, not 2 litres a day but am trying to substitute some of it with a glass of squash occasionally