835
Revealed: WHO aspartame safety panel linked to alleged Coca-Cola front group (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
208 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

It uncovered eight WHO panelists involved with assessing safe levels of aspartame consumption who are beverage industry consultants who currently or previously worked with the alleged Coke front group, International Life Sciences Institute (Ilsi).

Their involvement in developing intake guidelines represents “an obvious conflict of interest”, said Gary Ruskin, US Right-To-Know’s executive director. “Because of this conflict of interest, [the daily intake] conclusions about aspartame are not credible, and the public should not rely on them,” he added.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] -5 points 2 years ago (2 children)

That's not what this is saying. This is saying the studies saying it IS harmful were real, and the part saying "it's probably safe in small amounts" was industry-influenced.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    No, this is just saying the safe dosage level was biased by people from the industry being on that particular panel.

    Despite the IARC’s new designation, the Joint FAO-WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), which determines safe doses of food additives, did not change its recommendation for daily intake of aspartame. JECFA still says that consuming 40 milligrams of aspartame per every 1 kilogram of body weight (about 2.2 pounds) per day is acceptable, according to a news release.

    This is just 1 panel that determined the safe dosage level. This does not affect the findings of the study at all which concluded that aspartame is "possibly carcinogenic to humans" but that "We don’t know enough about the possible link between aspartame and cancer, but we can’t ignore that there’s something going on"

    So they haven't even found a definitive link or even said it's definitively dangerous. And the 40 milligrams per 1 kilogram of body weight is the same as the recommendation from the FDA.

    Also the thing it is replacing, sugar, IS known to cause cancer, diabetes, and other diseases. So take that as you will.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 2 years ago

    That last bit is what people always seem to miss.

    Getting hit in the head with a branch is bad for you, but it's less bad for you than a bullet.

    In the end, you need to compare the two risks, and not decide "a is bad, no need to look at b"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago

    I don't much care what one study is saying. We've studied this chemical so much and we still have no conclusive proof it's harmful. At some point you really gotta focus money elsewhere.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent