In trying to find an answer, I discovered a whole list of artificial sweeteners, some I had never even heard of.  Here is a list of all the artificial sweeteners that are currently being used in the US:

1. Aspartame  = Nutrasweet and Equal, introduced in 1981
2. Saccharin = Sweet N' Low, discovered in 1879 and has been used for 125 years
3. Sucralose = Splenda, discovered in 1976, approved in 1998, and is the only artificial sweetener actually made from sugar
4. Acesulfame-K = Sunnet, used in 90 countries, discovered in1967, but only recently approved in the US
5. Neotame, approved by FDA in 2002

Cyclamate, alitame, stevioside, thaumatin, and neohesperidine DC are artificial sweeteners used in other countries.

A review which was published in the Annals of Oncology in January 2004 does a good job of summarizing the history of saccharin, aspartame, and cyclamate and their associated studies.  Many of the publications which reported an associated risk between cancer and aspartame did so by trying to correlate the rising incidence of cancer and the introduction of aspartame to the US.  The article concluded that this was inadmissible in epidemiology, and based on studies done on animals and a case-control study of brain tumors in children, there was no evidence that there was an association between aspartame and cancer.  The article did conclude that there was an association between high doses of saccharin and increased risk of bladder cancer in rats.  However, ascorbic acid (or vitamin C) was also associated with increased risk of bladder cancer in rats, and the association seemed to be more related to the fact that these rodents were sensitive to sodium salts (sodium saccharin and sodium ascorbate).

Unfortunately, there are few epidemiological studies on the newer generation artificial sweeteners such as sucralose, neotame, and acesulfame-K since they were only recently approved by the FDA.   I did find a study done on mice which found that a blend of aspartame and asulfame-K was not genotoxic.  Another study showed that sucralose was not carcinogenic for mice. 

The take home message seems to be that artificial sweeteners are not significantly associated with cancer.  And in fact, they are beneficial to diabetics who need to watch their carbohydrates and are effective sugar substitutes for those who are trying to maintain weight loss. Caution should be given to the newer generation of artificial sweeteners, but so far, things look promising.

I realize that the FDA approval of aspartame was fought vigorously by several FDA members such as Dr. Adrian Gross http://www.dorway.com/gross.txt and Dr. James D. Bowen in their sworn testimony where they basically tore the industry-sponsored Searle Studies (that led to aspartame’s approval) to shreds. Granted G. D. Searle is a subsidiary of Monsanto. I mean, who doesn’t trust Monsanto’s scientists?!

Thank God, Ronald Reagan fired the anti-aspartame FDA commissioner and hired Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes. Only a man like Hayes had the wisdom to stand up to his own Board of Inquiry (set up because nearly all other FDA members pleaded to deny aspartame approval) and overrule them. Ok, so I admit it’s a little suspicious that he left the FDA to go to work for Searle's PR firm and refused to speak to the press about it for 10 years, but politics is irrelevant. This blog is about the patients and the integrity of studies-politics certainly has no effect on either of those!

Granted, some Doctors such as Joseph Mercola point out the many published results of aspartame poisoning on rumor websites such as http://www.mercola.com/2004/jan/7/aspartame_disease.htm with his “references to published studies” but we all know paranoia when we see it ;)

So I lift my delicious cocktail of Phenylalanine, Aspartic Acid and Methanol to those paranoid FDA Toxicologists and Doctors who choose to miss out on what is delicious and EQUALLY nutritious…

CHEERS!

While the legions of armchair researchers clutter the internet espousing the urgent dangers of aspartame, the clinical studies are available for those willing to take the time. My personal favorites include the European Food Safety Authority located at http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scf/out155_en.pdf and the U.K. Food Standards Agency’s study located at http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2002/dec/aspartamereview and the The French Food Safety Agency (AFSSA) http://www.aspartame.org/pdf/AFSSA-Eng.pdf

To a non-medical public, L-alpha-aspartyl-L-phenylalanine methyl ester sounds both unnatural and frightening. The truth is, that many natural foods contain much higher quantities of these compounds. For example, a single 8 oz serving of milk provides about 6 times more phenylalanine and 13 times more aspartic acid than the same quantity of a commercial diet soft drink sweetened entirely with Equal. The equivalent serving of Tomato juice contains six times more methanol. Until we are advised by the FDA to avoid milk and tomato juice as deadly toxins, aspartame seems innocuous by comparison.

In conclusion, the public aspartame debate (that has shaped so many patients’ opinions) has been more myth than science. If you are going to give up diet soft drinks, do so because they can dissolve a nail in 24 hours ;)