NNNS: Adverse Effects in the General Population (2011)

NNNS: Adverse Effects in the General Population (2011)

  • Assessment
    What is the evidence from human subjects research that aspartame consumption is associated with adverse effects in the general population?
    • Conclusion

      Aspartame consumption is not associated with adverse effects in the general population. Studies have found no evidence of a wide range of adverse effects of aspartame including hypersensitivity reactions, elevated blood methanol or formate levels and hematopoeitic or brain cancers. Neurological changes tested included cognitive functions, seizures, headaches and changes in memory or mood.

      The 2009 update did not find new studies meeting the inclusion criteria for this question and the N&NNS workgroup (2009) concurs with the conclusion above formulated by the Aspartame workgroup (2008).

    • Grade: I
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    What is the evidence from human subjects research that neotame consumption is associated with adverse effects in the general population?
    • Conclusion

      To date, no studies from human subject research in peer-reviewed literature were identified to evaluate adverse effects of neotame consumption in the general population.

       


       

    • Grade: V
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    What is the evidence from human subjects research that saccharin consumption is associated with adverse effects in the general population?
    • Conclusion

      Limited research in humans, from peer-reviewed journals, did not find an association between adverse effects and the intake of saccharin in the general population. No data from longitudinal cohort studies were available for review.

      The 2009 update did not find new studies meeting the inclusion criteria for this question; the Nutritive and Non-nutritive Sweeteners Workgroup (2009) reviewed and accepted the studies (Sommer et al 2004, Weihrauch and Diehl 2004, and Jensen and Kamby 1982) identified by the Non-nutritive Sweeteners Workgroup (2006).

    • Grade: III
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.
    What is the evidence from human subjects research that sucralose consumption is associated with adverse effects in the general population?
    • Conclusion

      Limited research in humans, from peer-reviewed journals, did not find an association between adverse effects and the intake of sucralose in the general population. No data from longitudinal cohort studies were available for review.

      The Nutritive and Non-nutritive Sweeteners Workgroup (2009-10) reviewed and accepted the studies (Grice and Goldsmith, 2000; Weihrauch et al, 2004) identified by the Non-nutritive Sweeteners Workgroup (2006) and found one additional article (Grotz and Munro, 2009) meeting the inclusion criteria for the update of this question.

    • Grade: III
      • Grade I means there is Good/Strong evidence supporting the statement;
      • Grade II is Fair;
      • Grade III is Limited/Weak;
      • Grade IV is Expert Opinion Only;
      • Grade V is Not Assignable.
      • High (A) means we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect;
      • Moderate (B) means we are moderately confident in the effect estimate;
      • Low (C) means our confidence in the effect estimate is limited;
      • Very Low (D) means we have very little confidence in the effect estimate.
      • Ungraded means a grade is not assignable.