Live data from Hacker News

Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

theguardian.com

301–310 of 584 posts

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#301

The challenge you have here is that aspartame isn't just one of most widely studied substances in the food chain, but that it's also one of the most widely and vigorously consumed. People drink a lot of diet soda; a lot of people drink it to the exclusion of all other liquids. So it's going to be tricky to get the epidemiology to match up with the claim here: if aspartame is meaningfully carcinogenic (meaning: more t…

It’s also got over 50 years in the food chain.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#302
post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should. There are plenty of chemicals that you regularly consume which, in high dosages, are fatal but are required at low dosages. Too much calcium will causes osteopetrosis (too little does as well). Too much vitamin K causes liver damage Too much vitamin B1 causes hypertension Plenty of stuff is dangerous at high levels and safe at low levels. Our kidneys and liver exist to filter and eliminate excess.

Too little or too much of many foods will be bad Where Aspartame is unhealthy in soda could use more detailed light shed on it. There may be some issue with how it’s used for food and soda in second and third world countries compared to First world.

> Where Aspartame is unhealthy in soda could use more detailed light shed on it.

I imagine it's complex, with indirect affects, with its ability to modulate the gut: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/artificial-sweete...

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#303

The challenge you have here is that aspartame isn't just one of most widely studied substances in the food chain, but that it's also one of the most widely and vigorously consumed. People drink a lot of diet soda; a lot of people drink it to the exclusion of all other liquids. So it's going to be tricky to get the epidemiology to match up with the claim here: if aspartame is meaningfully carcinogenic (meaning: more t…

Yeah I drink a lot of Pepsi Max. I just love it especially in summer. I've drank it for decades. Would this make me worry a lot? Not really. I have worse health risks like being overweight, pfas etc. The "if it was that dangerous we'd see the effect" is a pretty decent argument IMO considering it's been heavily used for almost 40 years.

Well, aspartame has been shown more recently and by studies not funded by the food industry to impair glucose tolerance in obese people. And soda cans are lined with plastic, so there's your PFAS intake.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#304
post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it a healthy alternative to sugar? If you have a one in five chance to live ten years longer because you don't develop cardiovascular issues from obesity, but one in a million develops cancer, I mean... It's going to depend on how this turns out exactly.

The WHO recently conditionally recommended against using non-sugar sweeteners for weight control. Their stance is that we should be reducing sweetened food/beverage intake in general, rather than trying to find healthier ways to sweeten what we eat. https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-...

While that is their stance, it is conditioned on what they seem to consider to be good evidence that using non-sugar sweeteners for weight control does not work (at the level of public health, that is; for individuals, YMMV.)

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#305
post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cancer rates are rising rapidly. Soon 50% of people will have cancer. I’d say something is going on

Something is bound to get ya. As we get better at managing other diseases and risks, cancer - which is seldom truly curable - gets a larger share. The progress on other fronts really is staggering. Forget pre-industrial times: global child mortality is half of what it was in the 1980s. The same is true for vehicle deaths in the US.

Well, I'd also say that as society continues to get more complex we're exposed to more and more previously-unknown substances, chemicals, and compounds. Kids used to play in the DDT mist sprayed by trucks. How many DDTs are there right now that we don't know about? I'd guess a whole lot.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#306
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that bacon itself is not the culprit of the possible (note — possible) carcinogen. The sodium nitrate that is often used as a preservative is. Nitrate-free bacon is easy to find though.

Nitrate-free (or, "no nitrates added") bacon still contains nitrates. About the same amount as standard bacon, and in some cases, more. https://www.americastestkitchen.com/cooksillustrated/how_tos...

A big problem with the these "nitrate free" forms is that Vitamin C was required in the "nitrate" versions, to prevents the formation of some of the carcinogens [1]. In the "nitrate free" versions, it is not! I make sure to drink orange juice, or take a vitamin C, with any form of bacon.

[1] https://locavoredelivery.com/blog/some-facts-about-bacon-wit...

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#307
post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it a healthy alternative to sugar? If you have a one in five chance to live ten years longer because you don't develop cardiovascular issues from obesity, but one in a million develops cancer, I mean... It's going to depend on how this turns out exactly.

The WHO recently conditionally recommended against using non-sugar sweeteners for weight control. Their stance is that we should be reducing sweetened food/beverage intake in general, rather than trying to find healthier ways to sweeten what we eat. https://www.who.int/news/item/15-05-2023-who-advises-not-to-...

If we shift the context just a little bit, everyone would ridicule this kind of abstinence-only approach.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#308

Reminder that bacon is already a known carcinogen for those worrying about artificial sweeteners but happily eating processed meats.

It’s actually sodium nitrite that’s carcinogenic (after being exposed to high heat), and I can find bacon without sodium nitrite here pretty much at every grocery store.

This is not correct, in spirit of "is it carcinogenic": https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-prof...

This is why Vitamin C was a required additive, with "nitrate" cured meats. Unfortunately, it is not with the "nitrate from celery" forms, which should lead to more cancer.

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why stop with nitrates and nitrites? Acrylamide is a known human carcinogen, and occurs in a huge variety of cooking processes (including baking, frying, and grilling). If you eat potatoes, you're almost certainly putting yourself at more risk than aspartame is: we've got epidemiology and mechanism of action to back up the potato risk.

What's the danger with potatoes? Can you point me towards a study or something?

I think the poster meant "fried/roasted potatoes" (boiled are not included). Most Maillard reaction cooking involves a risk of creating potential carcinogens like acrylamide.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/2118565-are-potatoes-no...

Re: Aspartame sweetener to be declared possible cancer risk by WHO, say reports

#310
post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For people, if the "garbage" still has positive nutritional value that would otherwise be wasted due to taste.

What is an example of the good garbage that would otherwise be wasted? It seems like nutrient deficient junk food is the main beneficiary of these appetizing agents. Globally, we produce a huge surplus of calories but a deficit of micronutrients, fruits, and vegetables. The appetizing agents are mostly convincing people to eat more of the former, beyond what they need.

> What is an example of the good garbage that would otherwise be wasted? It seems like nutrient deficient junk food is the main beneficiary of these appetizing agents.

Most of a cow, honestly.

From a 1,300 lbs steer you'll get something like 600-650 pounds of usable meat (maybe a little more, depending on the breed). About a third of that resulting meat will be ground meat that'll best be used in burgers, sausages, hotdogs, and stuff like vienna sausages - which I would consider junk food. The rest of the carcass will be rendered into tallow, boiled down to produce gelatin for candy and jellies or bone broth for other dishes, and otherwise processed for human or animal consumption.

It's not as extreme as the junk food you're thinking of but ever since industrialization the amount of effort put into making food from slaughterhouse waste is incredible.

Post reply on HN