Now a new study, published on Thursday in PLOS Medicine, presents some worrying data from humans. What’s new – The researchers looked at health data for more than a decade from 102,865 French volunteers. They found that the consumption of artificial sweeteners was associated with an increased risk of cancer. In particular, the researchers found that those who consumed any type of artificial sweetener were 13 to 14 percent more likely to develop cancer than those who did not. Artificial sweeteners are chemicals that have almost no calories, making them look like a healthy alternative to sugar. The researchers looked at three common sweeteners separately: aspartame, potassium acesulfame and sucralose. Acesulfame Potassium is sold in the USA under the brand names Sunett and Sweet One. Aspartame is sold as NutraSweet or Equal. Sucralose you may know as Splenda.

Cancer rates were 15 percent higher for higher aspartame users and 12 percent higher for lower consumers. More than others, aspartame intake was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, with a 22% higher chance of being consumed by higher consumers. Cancer rates were 13 percent higher for higher consumers of potassium acesulfame and 12 percent higher for lower consumers. Sucralose seemed to have the least to do with cancer: Rates were no higher for higher consumers and 3 percent higher for lower consumers.

Because artificial sweeteners differ greatly in how much of each one is needed for the desired sweetness, the researchers calculated individual measurements of high and low for each. As is customary in such studies, all of these figures were the result of adjustments to take into account certain cancer risk factors, including age, gender and tobacco use, to make them more representative of the French population as a whole. How they did it – The researchers used data from the NutriNet-Santé study, for which more than 170,000 French citizens agreed to submit information on their habits and health outcomes for decades, for researchers to extract for correlations. The study began in 2009. The researchers looked at data from then until January 2021. Every six months, volunteers receive a notification to keep a food diary, recording all the food and beverages they consumed that day, and even photographing and holding containers to determine portion sizes. Because of this, the researchers obtained a decent record of what artificial sweeteners a person consumed on average and how much. Why it matters – Artificial sweeteners – also called sugar substitutes, non-nutritive sweeteners and high-intensity sweeteners – are chemicals that have almost no calories, making them look like a healthy alternative to sugar. (The whole idea of ​​diet soda was to replace the natural sugar once used in Coca-Cola with a calorie-free substitute.) The FDA currently allows six artificial sweeteners in the US and are widely used in processed foods:

Saccharin was discovered in 1879 and is still found in fruit juices, candies, jams, jellies and biscuits, especially those labeled “low fat”. Aspartame was approved by the FDA in 1981 and is often added to soft drinks, energy drinks, desserts, candies, chewing gum and weight loss products. Potassium acesulfame, approved in 1988, is used in soft drinks and protein drinks and is added to medicines to make them more palatable. Sucralose was approved in 1998 and used for many of the same purposes as aspartame. Neotam and antvantam were approved in 2002 and 2014, respectively, and are not yet widely used.

The first four are also allowed in the European Union. Almost as soon as Johns Hopkins University chemists discovered saccharin, the debate over the safety of artificial sweeteners began. A product of the 1980s fitness craze, diet soda replaced sugar with artificial sweeteners to create a low-calorie soda. Jonathan Brady – PA Images / PA Images / Getty Images Following the passage of the Clean Food and Drugs Act in 1906, amid fears of “falsification” of food, the newly established Food and Drug Administration considered a complete ban on saccharin. President Theodore Roosevelt, who went on a sugar-free diet, intervened and even called his public health adviser “stupid” on the issue. Studies showing that saccharin caused bladder cancer in mice led to its labeling in the United States, a ban in Canada, and a worldwide reduction in its use. Starting in 1978, each pack of Sweet ‘N Low and countless cans of diet soda warned that they contained a product that could cause cancer in experimental animals. Scientists saw this reasoning as wrong, even panicked. The mechanism by which saccharin caused cancer in mice did not work in humans and one would have to drink hundreds of diet soft drinks by injecting twelve ounces of saccharin daily to reach the doses given to laboratory mice. The United States removed the warning labels in 2000, and Canada reversed its ban in 2011. After all, many are now confused as to whether they are “better” than sugar. Researchers say this is the first study to directly evaluate artificial sweeteners, not soda as a substitute. Research like this could settle the debate over artificial sweeteners, but they will probably rekindle it first.