The World Health Organization (WHO) warns against sugar-free sweeteners. It says the sweeteners do not confer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children and even have "potential undesirable effects" on health, such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and premature death. The recommendation applies to all people except diabetics. The recommendation is based on the findings of a systematic review of the available evidence on the risks and side effects of various sweeteners: Acesulfame K (E950), Advantame (E969), Aspartame (E951), Cyclamate (E952), Neotame (E961), Saccharin (E954), Steviol glycosides (E960), Sucralose (E955). Until now, cyclamate was officially considered unproblematic. The suspicion of causing bladder cancer, which led to a ban in the USA in 1969, is now considered refuted. Nevertheless, the substance remained banned there. In rare individual cases, skin reactions have been observed (urticaria, i.e. hives), but according to German authorities, this is neither cause for concern nor for warnings. The calorie-free sweetness is attributed the positive effect of supporting overweight people in their weight control and weight loss. At least in mice, cyclamate, like some other artificial sweeteners, seems to have the opposite effect. In a study conducted in Hungary in 2010, the mice supplied with sweeteners in drinking water gained considerably more weight with the same food supply than the mice in a comparison group that did not receive sweeteners.In other animal experiments, the sweetener had also changed the bacterial community in the intestine, but this has not yet been proven in humans.
The sweetener is used for beverages, desserts, confectionery, dairy products, bakery products, spreads such as jam, jam, jellies and canned fruit as well as food supplements. The field of application is very clearly defined in the corresponding regulation, with the respective maximum amount for the many foods that are calorie-reduced or have no added sugar. One kilogram of food may contain between 250 and 2500 milligrams of the additive.
Cyclamate is the second oldest artificial sweetener. It is 35 to 70 times as sweet as sugar, has no calories, does not raise blood sugar and does not cause tooth decay. In higher concentrations, it tastes slightly bitter and metallic. "Cyclamate" is the name for the artificial sweetener cyclamic acid (cyclohexylsulphamic acid) and its calcium or sodium salts. It was accidentally discovered in 1937 at the University of Illinois after a cigarette was contaminated with a cyclohexylamine derivative. In 1940, the chemical company DuPont received a patent for it, and in 1950 it came onto the market. The consumption of cyclamates increased until 1969, when it was banned in the USA and other countries due to safety concerns because of its potential carcinogenicity. However, later studies have refuted the suspicion so that the sweetener is still approved in other countries, including the European Union. Cyclamate is not metabolized by the human body, so it does not contribute energy to nutrition. Because cyclamate is not metabolized in the body and excreted unchanged via the renal system, the artificial sweetener, which is used in large quantities, ends up in wastewater. This represents an increasing environmental problem in numerous countries including Australia. Even with very efficient wastewater treatment plant technology, the sweetener cannot be removed. It is therefore found in every river and lake and at the end of this chain, albeit only in small quantities, also in drinking water.
About the DR. WATSON Database of Additives
Carefully researched, factual, understandable: The DR. WATSON database provides reliable information on industrial additives in food. The data in the DR. WATSON database are based on the official accounts of the responsible authorities, but show a comprehensive picture and also report on research results of independent and recognized institutions around the world.
DR. WATSON was the first information service to evaluate additives, conduct its own research, consult thousands of studies and analyze them uniformly according to the criteria of evidence-based medicine. Our approach is clearly defined and transparent.
In this process, the DR. WATSON team was supported by recognized scientists and also sought legal advice. The DR. WATSON database is regularly updated and expanded. DR. WATSON is independent of outside interests and institutions.
Dr. WATSON consistently looks at novel ingredients of food from the perspective of consumers. The DR. WATSON database of additives provides information not only on additives and their health implications but also on their distribution: after all, it comes down to individual decisions of consumers on the basis of personal preferences and inclinations.
Important information on risks of additives in industrial food
DR. WATSON’s database of food additives does not give medical advice or recommendations. The DR. WATSON database provides information about additives – independent, scientifically sound, comprehensible.
Officially, additives in industrial food are considered harmless. So if you eat little of it and are of a robust constitution, you have nothing to worry about. (For allergies, however, a milligram of the wrong thing can be fatal.)
With the limits being raised for what are considered safe consumption amounts, the chemical additives in food are becoming a health risk for more and more people. For many additives, side effects are proven beginning at a certain amount – and those side effects can be more severe than previously suspected. Especially children consume more of such additives than is good for them (ADI).
These are risks that humans have created for themselves. They are not impurities stemming from contamination or spoilage, but intentionally added additives.
The additives in such foods do not serve the consumers but the manufacturers of industrial food.
Their primary purpose is to extend shelf life and reduce costs. The human organism does not need such chemicals. They also have no health benefits for consumers. Many of the additives can pose health risks.
Chemically produced additives, unlike normal ingredients such as cauliflower, cream, or chicken, are not traditional components of a dish or a food. The body therefore has no adequate, evolutionarily practiced mechanisms for processing them.
Humans do not need additives. Only the food industry needs them.
They serve to enhance the taste or color of industrial food – externally. More colorful effervescence, browner sauces, noodle soups with longer shelf life, airier cakes, rolls with enhanced bun scent, creamier cream cheese with less fat, yogurts with stabilized fruit pieces that don’t move around.
Industrial food is designed to appear more attractive — and for as long as possible (shelf life). Because in the world of factories and supermarkets, food has to be cheap and last an unnaturally long time which is only possible by means of chemical engineering.
Many industrial foods cannot do without additives. Bag soups would quickly mold, margarine would become rancid, fruit yogurts would separate into fruit preparation and yogurt. Ready-made salad dressings would disintegrate into its components of herbs, vinegar, and oil.
The chemical substances indicated with E numbers are essential for industrial food production.
Many of them were tailored to the needs of food factories, lab-made substances without a model in nature. Other substances used do occur in nature but by using them as additives, the quantities that are being consumed have grown disproportionately.
In the past, doctors and authorities have therefore expressed concerned about these chemical substances in food, especially in the case of sustained and long-term intake.
Since then the official stance has changed.
Substances that were once considered "xenobiotics" and were even reviled by experts as "poisons" have now not only been rehabilitated, but even ennobled. Although consumer deception is still officially banned, they are now considered "food improvement agents" (EU jargon). To regulate the handling of these noble ingredients, the European Union has adopted a whole quartet of regulations, the "Food Improvement Agents Package" (FIAP), consisting of four individual regulations on the different types of additives.
However, findings on the harmful effects of these "substances for the improvement of food" are increasing.
Flavour enhancers such as glutamate are suspected of contributing to diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's. Dyes can lead to hyperactivity and learning disorders (ADHD). Migraines can also be triggered by food additives. Sweeteners such as aspartame are even suspected of causing cancer. Preservatives can damage the intestines and disrupt the immune system. Citric acid can attack the teeth and also transport harmful metals such as aluminum into the brain. Industrial flavors can cause obesity. Phosphates can accelerate the aging process and cause diseases such as heart disease, high blood pressure, bone weakness, and osteoporosis to occur earlier in life.
Additives are only used in tiny doses. However, more and more substances are being authorized and the individual additives are being produced in ever larger quantities. Phosphates, for example, are used worldwide as food additives at a rate of over 300,000 tonnes per year. In the case of sweeteners, the annual figure is 750,000 tonnes. Citric acid is one of the record holders: About 3 million tons are produced worldwide every year, most of it for food. In the case of glutamate, it is even 3.3 million tons per year.
Surprisingly, the effects of the individual chemicals multiply when consumed jointly. This was shown, among other things, by a study conducted by the University of Liverpool with the two dyes E104 (quinoline yellow) and E133 (brilliant blue), the flavor enhancer glutamate (E621), and the sweetener aspartame (E951).
The result: The harmful effects of the additives on the brain (neurotoxicity) did not add up, as would be expected, but multiplied. A mixture of the blue dye E133 and glutamate (E621), for example, did not slow down cell growth by 15.8 percent, as would have been expected, but by 46.1 percent. One plus one therefore does not equal to two, but up to six.
When approving additives, it is always taken into account what quantities of which foods people consume. In animal experiments a dose is then determined which is released as a daily tolerable amount. A safety margin is then applied, and the so-called "ADI value" is calculated ("Acceptable Daily Intake"). From this, a maximum quantity is fixed for each food. This should be calculated in such a way that the ADI value is not exceeded even with frequent consumption.
But with many additives, especially children but also adults apparently consume far more than is good for them. This was the result of studies conducted by the EU Commission and the member states and the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA).
The recording of consumption volumes in the European Union seems to have been systematically delayed, as has been criticized even by the European Court of Auditors. In a special report, it strongly criticized the lax surveillance practice.
Authorities can therefore not give an absolute guarantee of safety, since they know neither about the exact quantities used in individual foods nor about the total quantities actually consumed.
As a result, since the supervisory authorities refuse to guarantee protection against the risks posed by additives, consumers must protect themselves.
So everyone has to know for themselves what they want to expose themselves to.
DR. WATSON helps – with solid information about food additives and their alternatives.
Because it is quite simple, life without E-numbers. There is a safe way to get by without additives: Real food. Cooking for yourself using fresh ingredients.
There are no additives in real food.
Make the dressing for the salad yourself, cook the soup fresh or for a few days in advance, stir fruit or jam into the natural yoghurt.
It is: the traditional way of eating. In medicine, for example, the Mediterranean diet is now considered the gold standard for the prevention of diseases.
And: it is also the most enjoyable way of eating. Some even speak of a "gourmet diet", which is primarily oriented towards taste - and thus towards the neurological laws for the optimal supply of the individually necessary nutrients.
And: It is not only best for humans, but also for animals and the environment. And, of course, the children, and thus the following generations, the future of the planet.