Paolini Moreno, Vivarelli Fabio, Sapone Andrea, Canistro Donatella
Department of Pharmacology and Biotechnology, Alma Mater Studiorum, University of Bologna, Italy.
Carcinogenesis. 2017 Dec 7;38(12):1249-1250. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgw025.
For the first time, the aspartame case shows how a corporation decided to ban an artificial ingredient in the wake of public opinion notwithstanding the regulatory assurance claims that it is safe. PepsiCo Inc. made an unprecedented decision most likely based on life-span carcinogenicity bioassay studies from the Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Center of the Ramazzini Institute (CMCRC/RI), which provide consistent evidence of aspartame's carcinogenicity in rodents. Although CMCRC/RI experiments have been criticized for not complying with Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) guidelines, the newly launched aspartame-free soft drink may not be an isolated case. In the light of vinyl chloride-, formaldehyde- or benzene-associated carcinogenicity discovered for the first time by CMCRC/RI in the same way, it seems the guidelines need to be re-evaluated to avoid the credibility of international regulatory agencies being compromised by consumer opinion.
阿斯巴甜事件首次表明，尽管监管机构宣称其安全，但一家公司如何在公众舆论的影响下决定禁止一种人工成分。百事公司做出了史无前例的决定，这很可能是基于拉马齐尼研究所切萨雷·马尔托尼癌症研究中心（CMCRC/RI）的寿命致癌性生物测定研究，这些研究提供了阿斯巴甜在啮齿动物中致癌性的一致证据。尽管CMCRC/RI的实验因不符合经济合作与发展组织（OECD）的指导方针而受到批评，但新推出的不含阿斯巴甜的软饮料可能并非个例。鉴于CMCRC/RI首次以同样方式发现的氯乙烯、甲醛或苯相关致癌性，似乎需要重新评估这些指导方针，以避免国际监管机构的公信力因消费者意见而受到损害。
