Artificial sweeteners face more bad press – but is it unfair?
By 
Julia Robinson2023-09-19T08:30:00
A raft of recent studies and World Health Organization advice leave sweeteners on the ropes, but health experts warn they shouldn’t be considered in isolation
In recent years, non-sugar sweeteners – often referred to as artificial, low-calorie or non-nutritive sweeteners – have been regularly making the headlines. However, it was rarely for positive reasons.
In March, a US study found that people with higher levels of erythritol in their blood had a notably higher risk of cardiovascular problems and in June, in vivo studies revealed that sucralose could be metabolised in the gut to form a compound that damages DNA.
Most recently, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified aspartame – a non-sugar sweetener widely used since the 1980s in products including diet drinks and chewing gum – as ‘possibly carcinogenic’ to humans . The grouping – which also includes the likes of pickled vegetables, caffeine and aloe vera – means that there is ‘limited evidence’ in humans and ‘less than sufficient evidence’ in experimental animals that aspartame is carcinogenic.