Guidelines are just beginning of process of purging these toxins from food chain
.jpg)
Non-sugar sweeteners have been approved by regulators across the world, but these assessments looked only at toxicological evidence and not long-term impacts. Photo: iStock The recent guidelines by the World Health Organization (WHO) on non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) are too late and too narrow in scope. But the fact that they could be released despite opposition from the stakeholders is commendable.
The guidelines released on May 15, 2023 recommended against using NSS to control body weight or reduce the risk of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs).
For the consumer, this means they would now have to figure out products with non-sugar sweeteners and avoid them. Other than soft drinks and chocolates, ice creams, sugar-free chewing gums and mouthwashes, they are also in many medicines.
Read more: Using sugar substitutes to lose weight could cause harm long-term, warns WHO
Though the guidelines do not pertain to the use of NSS in cosmetics and pharmaceuticals, the consumer would need to make a decision to use it or not.
This guideline pointed out that NSS do not confer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children. Instead, their use increases the risk of type-2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and mortality in adults. WHO published a 210-page-long review on the health impacts of NSS in 2022, followed by draft guidelines.
The guidelines, which are part of WHO’s efforts to improve dietary quality and decrease the risk of NCDs worldwide, have come in too late despite information on their harmful impacts and point towards a problem with our regulatory systems.
These sweeteners have been approved by regulators across the world. Even a Food and Agriculture Organization / WHO expert committee on food additives considered NSS to be safe. But these assessments looked only at toxicological evidence and not long-term impacts.
These bodies would now have to re-evaluate the safety of these products. For example, the International Agency for Research on Cancer would re-evaluate its assessment of the carcinogenic impact of aspartame between June 6 and June 13 this year.
Read more: India second-biggest market for sugary beverages: Lancet report
The sweetener lobby is strong. They managed to push in the sweeteners even in India despite the fact the natural sweeteners from sugarcane are available aplenty in the country.
At that time, these products were under patent and were very profitable for the manufacturers, which included bigwig multinationals like Monsanto, Tate & Lyle, and Johnson & Johnson at one time or another.
In a statement issued on May 15, 2023 in response to WHO’s guidelines, the low calorie sweetener industry maintained that NSS are safe and needed by people who want to watch their weight.
The NSS studied by WHO included acesulfame K, aspartame, advantame, cyclamates, neotame, saccharin, sucralose, stevia and stevia derivatives. The guidelines do not apply to low-calorie sugars and sugar alcohols (polyols), which are sugars or sugar derivatives containing calories.
High-fructose corn sugar, which is a sugar-made sweeter by the use of enzymes, too has been excluded from the assessment even though it is used extensively in processed junk food and is implicated in the obesity pandemic across the world.
On the other hand, stevia, which is a non-sugar sweetener used for centuries by people in South America, is on WHO’s list of sweeteners.
Stevia has faced opposition from the food industry and regulators for a long time. In India, the food authority initially did not approve of its use and said it was not a food item. It was only approved in 2015 in the country.
Read more: Super tiny particles derived from table sugar can detect lead in water
While WHO needs to be commended for coming out with these guidelines, it is sad that the global health body has woken up to the harmful effects of artificial sweeteners so late when they are part of most of the easily available processed foods.
Policy decisions based on these recommendations would now require country-specific discussions. If the country authorities accept the guidelines, the industry would need to reformulate its products. Experience with the elimination of transfats from food in India suggests that this might not happen anytime soon.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.