It uncovered eight WHO panelists involved with assessing safe levels of aspartame consumption who are beverage industry consultants who currently or previously worked with the alleged Coke front group, International Life Sciences Institute (Ilsi).

Their involvement in developing intake guidelines represents “an obvious conflict of interest”, said Gary Ruskin, US Right-To-Know’s executive director. “Because of this conflict of interest, [the daily intake] conclusions about aspartame are not credible, and the public should not rely on them,” he added.

  • ඞmir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s possible that the increased risk of diabetes snowballs into an increased risk of cancer from diabetes’ secondary conditions. Making claims about “these amino acids are harmless so the substance is harmless” disregards the possible chains of events that could actually cause more conditions.

    • Silverseren@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is something that can be researched and would apply to anything that tastes sweet, of course, if true. But that’s still not the things being claimed by people about the impacts aspartame is having on them.

      Essentially, they’re making claims akin to the MSG conspiracies, with the same lack of evidence for anything. Including with placebo studies showing the people claiming these effects also claiming it when they think they’re consuming the substance, but they aren’t.