When risk assessors like EFSA establish an ADI for a given substance, their scientific advice informs the decision-making of risk managers regarding the authorisation of specific proposed uses of the substance i. However, in reality, aspartame is used at lower levels and amounts found in soft drinks can be 3 to 6 times less than the maximum permitted levels; this would increase the number of cans required to meet the ADI to 36 or more. On all these occasions, the Authority has concluded that the new scientific data did not give reason to review the safety evaluation of aspartame or to revise the ADI.
Given the enormity of this task, the European Commission established a schedule of priorities for this systematic re-evaluation programme. Most sweeteners, like aspartame, are scheduled for re-evaluation towards the end of the review period as their safety was evaluated more recently than many other additives authorised for use in the EU; for example, colours, many preservatives and emulsifiers were considered more urgent as many of these approved food additives were evaluated several years before sweeteners.
However, any food additive can be re-prioritised at any time. In May , EFSA was asked by the European Commission to bring forward the full re-evaluation of the safety of aspartame from to after concerns were raised by Members of the European Parliament. Topic: Food additives — EU framework. EFSA published its scientific opinion on the safety of aspartame in December In January , EFSA launched a online public consultation on its draft opinion, inviting all stakeholders and interested parties to comment by 15 February Alongside scientific excellence, independence and responsiveness, openness and transparency are key values at EFSA and help to underpin consumer confidence in the EU food safety system.
In addition, consulting on draft scientific outputs is important to gather views, data sources and comments that can in turn ensure the completeness, clarity and effectiveness of the final outputs. EFSA regularly consults the scientific community and other stakeholders on its guidance documents and, when compatible with the procedures and deadlines laid down in the relevant EU legislation, also on important scientific outputs of keen public interest such as its opinion on aspartame.
This ensures that EFSA considers the widest possible range of views and scientific information. Feedback from the public consultation is then compiled in a report and, where appropriate, incorporated into the final scientific output. During the public consultation, the Authority received a total of comments on its draft opinion. The majority of these were submitted by NGOs and members of the public with most others originating from academia, national food safety agencies, the food industry and journalists.
Comments were grouped according to the following main topics: scientific aspects of the opinion; toxicity of methanol a breakdown product of aspartame and formaldehyde a metabolite of methanol ; consumer exposure to aspartame; editorial changes; as well as related policy issues for example, comments mistakenly directed at EFSA about the regulation of aspartame, such as requests to ban this sweetener which are not considered by EFSA given its role as scientific risk assessor.
The Panel considered all comments received. Prior to its authorisation and since its market introduction, the safety of aspartame has sparked interest and at times controversy. Questions have primarily been raised about some of the early experimental animal studies utilised to evaluate the safety of aspartame. In EFSA published a full risk assessment of aspartame. Extensive reviews on aspartame have been carried out by many national and international regulatory and advisory bodies.
All have concluded that the scientific evidence is sufficient to confirm that aspartame is safe for human consumption. Lists of published and unpublished studies and data files available for download: Results of the Call for scientific data on aspartame June Results of the Call for data on DKP and other potential degradation products of aspartame July EFSA considers all available scientific data and scientific literature in its risk assessments and takes account of all evidence that is produced to internationally recognised scientific standards.
The Authority may also decide on a case-by-case basis to use data from studies not performed according to current standards when new data are lacking as long as the design of such studies and the reporting of the data are considered appropriate and sound. This holds true whether the source is industry, the public sector, academia or other scientific organisations.
It is a fundamental principle of EU legislation that the organisations or companies set to profit from food additives and other regulated substances and products e. GMOs, active substances used in pesticides , must provide the evidence to prove that these substances are safe. Where new research on a specific substance is required to demonstrate its safety, manufacturers must bear the cost of producing the required data for the risk assessment. Regardless of the source, EFSA critically and rigorously evaluates all the data submitted as well as the design of the studies that produced them to ensure that they meet the standards required to ensure consumer protection.
EFSA provides guidance which lays down the specific requirements for the risk assessment of regulated substances and products such as food additives, flavourings, GMOs and food contact materials. No one expert, including the Chair, can unduly influence the decisions of the Panels. In those cases where Panels cannot reach consensus on a subject, experts can express minority views which are recorded in the scientific opinions.
EFSA is constantly vigilant to potential conflicts of interest whilst recognising that the top scientific experts in Europe can only gain their expertise by being active in their fields.
The independence of scientific experts and all those involved in the activities of EFSA is ensured by one of the most rigorous Declaration of Interest policies in force in the world. Topic: Independence. Observations of these key events in human and animal studies are compared to determine the relevance for human health.
The Authority neither authorises nor bans the use of substances in foods. It is the responsibility of risk managers in the European Commission, the European Parliament and the EU Member States to define and agree measures as and where required, taking into account scientific advice and other considerations.
What are the main conclusions of the opinion? Naturaler is a UK website full of tips and recommendations for living a more eco-friendly, chemical-free and natural lifestyle. Excellent article. The information has given me a comprehensive list of aspartame free choices. Thank you. Thanks for the info. Sadly many of the above use other artificial sweeteners that also cause health issues.
Ideally I would love a list of brands that just use sugar. Your email address will not be published. Skip to content Aspartame is a low-calorie synthetic powder that is about times sweeter than sugar. Table of Contents. Leave a Comment Cancel Reply Your email address will not be published. Leave this field empty. Rumors and concerns about aspartame causing a number of health problems, including cancer, have been around for many years.
Some of the concerns about cancer stem from the results of studies in rats published by a group of Italian researchers, which suggested aspartame might increase the risk of some blood-related cancers leukemias and lymphomas. However, later reviews of the data from these studies have called these results into question.
The results of epidemiologic studies studies of groups of people of possible links between aspartame and cancer including blood-related cancers have not been consistent. Depending on where you are in the world, we use either high fructose corn syrup or cane sugar to give you that refreshing taste you love.
Together, they create a great taste with zero sugar and zero calories. Diet Coke in our bottles and cans is sweetened with aspartame. No, but Sprite Zero in the US is sweetened with a blend of aspartame and Ace-K for a crisp, clean taste with reduced or no calories.
One of the first places you can look is the ingredients list next to the Nutrition Facts label.
0コメント