<i>"...aspartame – was associated with a 17% increased risk of cerebrovascular events, while acesulfame potassium and sucralose were linked to increased risk of coronary heart disease."</i><p>Here we go again! Aspartame is one of the most studied food additives ever with respect to safety and the general consensus from ~40 years of research and dozens of research teams is that it's safe–that is, up until now.<p>If this chemical is dangerous then why hasn't any of the copious research demonstrated any causal effects up until now? Moreover, aspartame is a relatively simple molecule and its breakdown metabolites are also simple and that the elimination of them from the body is well understood.<p>Like millions, I've a vested interest in these sweeteners. I'm not diabetic but I try to avoid sugar as much as I can so I'm a consumer of them.<p>Stories like this aren't very helpful if science repeatedly hits dead ends in its attempts to show why these sweeteners are dangerous and always concludes they're not.<p>If the sweeteners themselves aren't dangerous per se then perhaps there's some other factor involved such as the way we actually consume sweetened food.
I admit I’m happy to see this but I really wish we could come up with some research methodology that shows causation. This “linked to” thing is pretty hard to use as evidence to use in discussions with real humans.<p>For context, my family is entirely sucrose and fructose free and do not have any artificial sweeteners and my extended family finds this very very ridiculous and even harmful for toddlers.