European Journal of Nutrition & Food Safety, ISSN: 2347-5641,Vol.: 5, Issue.: 2 (April-June)
Perspectives on Low Calorie Intense Sweeteners with a Focus on Aspartame and Stevia
Caomhan Logue1, Stephan J. A. C. Peters2, Alison M. Gallagher1 and Hans Verhagen1,3* 1Northern Ireland Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), University of Ulster, Cromore Road, Coleraine, Northern Ireland. BT52 1SA, Northern Ireland.
2Netherlands Nutrition Centre (Voedingscentrum), P.O.Box 85700, 2508CK, Den Haag, The Netherlands.
3National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), P.O.Box 1, 3720 BA, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Caomhan Logue1, Stephan J. A. C. Peters2, Alison M. Gallagher1 and Hans Verhagen1,3*
1Northern Ireland Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), University of Ulster, Cromore Road, Coleraine, Northern Ireland. BT52 1SA, Northern Ireland.
The safety of some food additives/E-numbers, including low calorie (intense) sweeteners (LCS), is constantly the subject of dispute and controversy. However, since LCS have been assigned an acceptable daily intake (ADI) and an E-number following extensive assessment of available safety and toxicological data, consumer safety is assured. These substances have been carefully evaluated, for example by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), leading to the conclusion that they are essentially safe when consumption is below ADI levels. Although, intake data indicate that general consumption of LCS is relatively low, many people appear to remain concerned about their safety, particularly aspartame (E951). More recently, stevia (steviol glycosides, E960) has been marketed as a “natural” alternative to aspartame. However, it is unclear whether stevia can live up to its promises. With regards to public health, the real risk within our diet is not the safety of food additives, but rather more likely to be the potential impacts of consuming too much energy and/or an unhealthy dietary pattern.
Aspartame, stevia, steviol glycosides, low calorie sweeteners, safety, acceptable daily intake.
Full Article - PDF Page 104-112
DOI : 10.9734/EJNFS/2015/14815Review History Comments