From Peter Melchett, The Soil Association
For years, the products in which aspartame has been included have been marketed as a healthy way to cut sugar intake, yet we do not accept there is any nutritional benefit (6 May, p 40).
There is a more nutritious way to reduce sugar intake: simply eat more fresh, unprocessed food. The Soil Association is calling for an immediate withdrawal of approval for aspartame in food.
We question case-by-case scientific assessment as a suitable basis for protecting public health when it comes to artificial chemicals in food. The limitations of scientific testing, such as sample size and difficulty in testing “cocktail effects”, mean there can be inadequate information on which to base a responsible decision. We believe our principles of generally prohibiting artificial compounds in favour of natural unadulterated foods, and basing decisions on common sense, intuition and observation, as well as on controlled experimental evidence, are a much more reliable approach for protecting human health.
Aspartame is one of more than 300 artificial food additives that are prohibited in organic food.
Advertisement
From Richard Laming, British Soft Drinks Association
Contrary to what your correspondent Catherine Jones appears to believe (3 June, p 22), soft drinks containing aspartame are no sweeter than those containing sugar or other forms of nutritive sweetener. The fact that aspartame is so much sweeter means that very much less of it can be used.
Intense sweeteners allow consumers to enjoy soft drinks while restricting their calorie intake if they wish to do so. They are always listed on the label so that consumers can have the choice.
It is better to enable people to make their own decisions about diet and lifestyle than for public authorities to attempt to take control. Prohibition works less well than education and information.
London, UK
Bristol, UK
