Aspartame is an amino acid right? Isn’t it going to be in all sorts of proteins then? Doesn’t that make it rather implausible that it is toxic?
> Aspartame is an amino acid right? No, that's not right. It's a peptide (a unit composed of amino acids), not an amino acid. > Isn’t it going to be in all sorts of proteins then? Proteins are made of peptides but not all peptides are common in proteins, no. > Doesn’t that make it rather implausible that it is toxic? No, lots of proteins are toxic to particular organisms, too.
Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
61–70 of 315 posts
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that we have introduced so many new chemicals recently and have seen so many unexplained changes to health. Its virtually impossible to work out which thing did what. I'm not going to stress over aspartame though. Plastics, PFOA, PTFE, processed meats, and air pollution are way above on my concern scale. If I was concerned about cancer from aspartame, I would never touch any form of alcohol again.
O? What’s alcohol got to do with aspartame?
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#63Aspartame isn't just widely consumed, it's practically universally consumed. If it was carcinogenic in humans, wouldn't there be obvious epidemiological evidence to back that up?
That being said, this is a rodent study. Really not a good input to guide human behavior. And human cohort studies have only found associations with cancer after really long periods, like decades. Might be nothing there.
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not unreasonable to assume that the current rate of disease in our populations might be able to be lower since we weren't tracking the association of the introduction of products to safety in years past as well as we do today. A better question is, suppose it was known that it did create a small but measurable in lifetime cancer risk, would you actually want to keep consuming it? EDIT: Also aspartame is hardly u…
I don't know, like everybody else, I eat things with substantial amounts of acrylamide, which is a carcinogen we actually know is problematic, unlike aspartame. You're commenting on a story that suggests that even small exposures to aspartame might be dangerous. And you stopped drinking diet soda only recently. I think you might have a hard time finding an American (for instance) that hadn't consumed a substantial am…
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#65Are there any other common food ingredients that have a high chance of causing cancer?
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can find prop 65 warnings on basically anything heated to browning too. Coffee, cooked asparagus, bread, the list is gigantic: https://franzbakery.com/HTML/prop65
I’ve seen the prop65 warnings about reproductive health on Japanese canned coffee and tea, but I’ve never seen these warnings on any other canned drinks here in the US
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#67Aspartame isn't just widely consumed, it's practically universally consumed. If it was carcinogenic in humans, wouldn't there be obvious epidemiological evidence to back that up?
Basically the mechanism works because the hexagon ring slides between the base pairs and this leads to a lowest energy state due to a phenomenon call pi orbital stacking resulting in the molecule getting stuck there. The carbon chain is mostly valuable in the sense that it distances the rest of molecule from interfering with the stacking process.
Take a look at ethidium bromide or pretty much any other intercalating dna stain and you’ll see similar characteristics. It’s also extremely carcinogenic.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi-Stacking_(chemistry)
It’s analogous to getting some cloth stuck in your zipper. Sometimes you can zip and unzip easily enough but sometimes it’ll get stuck. My understanding is that really DNA replication issues tend to be the root cause of some, possibly many cancers but really that’s outside my expertise.
So I would say that it is internally consistent with my limited knowledge of biochemistry that aspartame is carcinogenic.
I would strongly caveat this with saying that these structures occur in pretty high frequency across many forms of plant and animal life. Chemists in my lab used to joke about how potatoes contain 17 or so know carcinogenic compounds so why buy organic. My point is, if you go looking for correlations with cancer in many forms of food, you will find them.
I think for most people, aspartame is not likely to be major risk factor unless you are consuming it in extreme quantities and otherwise live a very healthy life.
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#68Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
Aspartame also rapidly "breaks down into residual components, including aspartic acid, phenylalanine, methanol, and further breakdown products including formaldehyde and formic acid" on ingestion. [1] Even with no smoking gun for cancer, why would anyone tempt fate after reading that? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame#Metabolites
You forgot the second half of the paragraph from your source: > Human studies show that formic acid is excreted faster than it is formed after ingestion of aspartame. In some fruit juices, higher concentrations of methanol can be found than the amount produced from aspartame in beverages. Also: > Aspartame consists of two amino acids—aspartic acid and phenylalanine. When ingested, aspartame is broken down into these…
Re: Aspartame and cancer – new evidence for causation
#70Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi has the most aspartame, at 188mg/can (12 oz). So, for someone weighing 50kg, the currently allowed dose is 2000 mg/day. Or 10 cans/day.
For a few years around 2015, Pepsi tried switching from aspartame to sucralose. But that was unpopular.
One comment is that aspartame is the most studied artificial sweetener. Others may be worse but less studied.