Letters: Bitter sweet

This refers to the report about the low-calorie sweetener stevia in “Coca-Cola applies to food safety body on new sweetener” (November 9). As a nutrition professional with the Calorie Control Council, I found the comments describing the low-calorie sweeteners acesulfame K, sucralose (brand name Splenda), and aspartame as “synthesised chemicals that are carcinogenic” not only inaccurate but false, and not based on sound science.

Low-calorie sweeteners are among the most rigorously tested ingredients in the food supply. The safety of sucratose, aspartame and acesulfame K has been confirmed by leading medical, scientific and regulatory authorities around the world, including the US Food and Drug Administration, the Joint Food and Agriculture Organisation/ World Health Organisation Expert Committee on Food Additives and the European Commission’s Scientific Committee for Foods. The safety of sucralose is documented by one of the most extensive and thorough safety testing programmes on a new food additive. There is no reason to believe that sucralose could have any negative health impact, including cancer, as most of it is not absorbed or accumulated in the body. Moreover, studies show that low-calorie sweeteners, including sucralose, can be useful for managing calories as well as blood glucose, which are common concerns.

More than three decades of research and 200 studies support the safety of aspartame. Importantly, aspartame never enters the bloodstream and thus there can be no physiological damage. More than 90 studies have demonstrated the safety of acesulfame K on nine separate occasions in broadening its approval. Acesulfame K has been used in Europe since 1983 and in the US since 1988, with no known documented adverse health effects.

Joan Patton, Atlanta