Sugar substitute used in beverages may be effective against cancer
Share
1 Answer
You must login to add an answer.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
You must login to add an answer.
Optimized by Seraphinite Accelerator
English 
العربية
Current scientific consensus does not support the idea that sugar substitutes in beverages are effective against cancer. In fact, the research is primarily focused on whether they cause cancer or have other negative health effects, and the findings are complex and sometimes conflicting. Here's a sumRead more
Current scientific consensus does not support the idea that sugar substitutes in beverages are effective against cancer. In fact, the research is primarily focused on whether they cause cancer or have other negative health effects, and the findings are complex and sometimes conflicting.
See lessHere’s a summary of what the major health organizations and research suggest:
* No strong evidence of causing cancer: Many regulatory bodies, like the FDA, and organizations like Cancer Research UK and the World Cancer Research Fund, generally state that there is no strong evidence that approved artificial sweeteners cause cancer in humans at typical consumption levels.
* “Possibly carcinogenic”: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified aspartame as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B) in 2023. This classification means there is limited, but not convincing, evidence of cancer in humans, or convincing evidence in experimental animals but not both. It’s not a definitive link and highlights the need for more research.
* Some studies suggest a link: Some observational studies, like a 2022 study of over 100,000 French adults, have suggested a potential link between higher consumption of artificial sweeteners (particularly aspartame and acesulfame-K) and an increased overall cancer risk, including breast and obesity-related cancers. However, these are observational studies, which means they can show an association but not necessarily a direct cause and effect. Other factors could be at play.
* Focus on reducing sugar: A more established link is between high sugar consumption (especially from sugar-sweetened beverages) and an increased risk of weight gain and obesity, which in turn is a known risk factor for many cancers. Therefore, the general recommendation from health organizations is to limit sugar-sweetened drinks and prioritize water or unsweetened alternatives.
* Not a “cure” or “treatment”: There is no evidence whatsoever that sugar substitutes act as a treatment or are “effective against” cancer. Cancer treatment involves specific medical interventions.
In conclusion, while sugar substitutes are often used to reduce calorie intake and manage weight (which can indirectly impact cancer risk by preventing obesity), there is no scientific basis to claim they are “effective against cancer” in a direct sense. The ongoing research is mainly concerned with their safety and potential long-term effects on human health.