In 2023 IARC classified aspartame as 'possibly carcinogenic to humans' (Group 2B).
Original statement
وفي 2023 صنّفت IARC الأسبارتام «مُسرطناً محتملاً» من الفئة 2B.
verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.
Translation
In 2023 IARC classified aspartame as 'possibly carcinogenic to humans' (Group 2B).
Origin
- Source status
- Archive editors
- Attribution
- Archive editors (study selection and narrative are the archive's, not necessarily Elawady's)
- Origin
- https://eltayebat.com/rule/ultra-processed-foods/
- Attribution uncertainty
- The archive homepage states that the forbidden-food section is supported by research 'independently of Dr. Diaa's words'. No evidence was found that Elawady himself cited these studies.
- Claimed mechanism
Not specified.
- Claimed health effect
Cancer (hepatocellular carcinoma).
- Population concerned
General population
- Geographic restriction by Elawady
none found
Scientific assessment
True – The statement is supported by robust evidence.
Certainty of evidence: high – Further research is very unlikely to change the assessment.
1. What was claimed?
IARC classified aspartame as Group 2B.
2. What is demonstrably correct?
Correct: IARC classified aspartame as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) on the basis of limited evidence (hepatocellular carcinoma).
3. What is wrong or exaggerated?
The archive omits that IARC classifies hazard, not risk at a given exposure, and that JECFA reaffirmed the ADI of 0-40 mg/kg body weight in the same release; a 70 kg adult would need more than 9-14 cans of diet soft drink per day (200-300 mg aspartame each) to exceed it.
4. What remains unclear?
Long-term cancer risk at typical intakes.
5. Which studies support it?
6. Which studies contradict it?
I-SOD-09 (JECFA ADI).
7. What applies to Germany and Europe?
Aspartame (E951) is authorised in the EU.
8. What is known about Egypt?
No Egypt data.
9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?
The classification is correct but does not show harm at usual intakes.
Assessment details
- Rationale for certainty of evidence
Directly verifiable fact from the WHO/IARC/JECFA joint release (fetched).
- Source quality
Correct statement of fact; context omitted.
- Regional transferability
Global.
- Individual exceptions
Not applicable.
- Regional scope of the claim
- general (biological/medical)
- Last reviewed
- 26 October 2026 provisional
Scientific evidence in detail
Scientifically well supported – The claim agrees with consistent, high-quality evidence.
Research question: Did IARC classify aspartame as Group 2B in 2023?
Research question in detail (other (fact check of a classification))
- Population
- Not applicable
- Intervention or exposure
- Aspartame
- Comparison
- Not applicable
- Geographic scope
- universal biology
- Outcomes
- IARC classification
Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.
What speaks for the claim?
IARC on aspartame
Riboli E et al.. Lancet Oncol 2023 · PMID 37454664 · DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00341-8 Risk assessmentfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessmentIARC Monographs summary: aspartame Group 2B.
- Actual result
- Limited evidence in humans (HCC).
- Methodological quality
- high (primary source)
- Relevance
- direct
IARC and JECFA on aspartame
WHO / IARC / JECFA. WHO news release 2023 Risk assessmentfull text checkedWHO/IARC/JECFA release.
- Actual result
- Group 2B; ADI 40 mg/kg reaffirmed.
- Methodological quality
- high
- Relevance
- direct
What speaks against the claim?
No high-quality evidence against the claim was found.
What does the overall evidence say?
Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.
Which position is better supported?
True as stated.
Why some studies weigh more
Primary sources.
Is a causal relationship established? Not applicable Factual claim.
Remaining uncertainty
Long-term risk at typical intake.
Justified conclusion
Correct fact; classification reflects limited evidence of hazard, not established risk.
Does this depend on the country?
- General biological effects
- Not applicable.
- Eating habits
- Not applicable.
- Origin of the food
- Not applicable.
- Contaminants
- Not applicable.
- National production conditions
- Not applicable.
- Legal rules
- Aspartame authorised in EU (E951).
- Actual monitoring data
- None.
A regional difference that changes the conclusion is not supported by robust data.
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
- Main outcome
- Fact of classification
- Starting level
- high (randomised trials)
- Result
- high
Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.
Clinical guidelines and official statements checked
- WHO / IARC / JECFA: Aspartame hazard and risk assessment results released (I-SOD-09) (2023) · Original publication
IARC classified aspartame as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) on limited evidence (hepatocellular carcinoma); JECFA reaffirmed the ADI of 40 mg/kg body weight (page re-fetched 2026-10-26).
Search strategy
Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).
| Database | Date | Search | Looking for | Hits | Included |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | TITLE:aspartame AND (TITLE:IARC OR TITLE:carcinogen* OR TITLE:"Group 2B" OR TITLE:"hazard") | both directions | 25 | |
| WHO website | 26 October 2026 | https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released (re-fetched) | guidelines | 1 |
How deeply was this checked?
2 linked studies: 2 checked in full text (1 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 0 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.
Last scientific review: 26 October 2026
History of the verdict
- 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: True (high)
- 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: True (high)
Primary source re-fetched; no change.
In plain language
In 2023 the WHO cancer agency placed aspartame in its third-highest category, 'possibly carcinogenic', because evidence was limited. At the same time, WHO and FAO experts confirmed that up to 40 mg per kg of body weight per day is acceptable. For an adult of 70 kg, that is more than 9 to 14 cans of diet soft drink per day.
Studies on this claim
Studies supporting the claim (2)
-
IARC on aspartame
Riboli E et al.. Lancet Oncol 2023 · PMID 37454664 · DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00341-8Risk assessmentcited by the Tayebat archivefull text, structured risk-of-bias assessmentIARC placed aspartame in Group 2B ('possibly carcinogenic') on limited evidence.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Hazard classification of aspartame.
- How was the study done?
IARC Monographs meeting summary (news).
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Not applicable; Not applicable
- What was actually found?
No abstract in PubMed. Per WHO/IARC/JECFA release (I-SOD-09): Group 2B based on limited evidence in humans (hepatocellular carcinoma), limited in animals, limited mechanistic.
- How large was the observed effect?
Not applicable
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Hazard category, not proof of risk.
- What are the study's limitations?
Classifies whether aspartame can cause cancer at all (hazard), not how likely it is at normal intake; the evidence in humans, animals and mechanistic studies was all rated 'limited'.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports C-UPF-08 (fact).
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cancer risk at normal intake.
-
IARC and JECFA on aspartame
WHO / IARC / JECFA. WHO news release 2023Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key studyIARC said 'possibly carcinogenic' on limited evidence; JECFA kept the safe daily limit of 40 mg/kg.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Carcinogenic hazard and acceptable intake of aspartame.
- How was the study done?
Joint hazard (IARC) and risk (JECFA) assessment (news release read in full).
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Not applicable; General population
- What was actually found?
IARC: Group 2B (limited evidence in humans for hepatocellular carcinoma; limited in animals; limited mechanistic). JECFA: no sufficient reason to change the ADI of 0-40 mg/kg bw; a 70 kg adult would need >9-14 cans/day (200-300 mg each) to exceed it. IARC classifications reflect strength of evidence, not risk at a given exposure.
- How large was the observed effect?
ADI 0-40 mg/kg bw
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Normal intake is within the safe limit for most people.
- What are the study's limitations?
Limited evidence base
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Applies; aspartame (E951) authorised in EU.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
That aspartame causes cancer.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (0)
No studies in this group.
Studies with mixed or unclear results (0)
No studies in this group.
Regional context
Germany / EU
Aspartame (E951) is authorised in the EU.
Egypt
No Egypt data.
What applies in my country?
General scientific assessment
True True as stated, but the classification describes limited evidence of hazard, not proven risk at normal intakes.
The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:
- Additives and processing
- Controls, imports, recalls, labelling
Choose a country to see the checked information for it.
Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.
Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country
References
- Carcinogenicity of aspartame, methyleugenol, and isoeugenol.. Riboli E et al.. Lancet Oncol 2023 · PMID 37454664 · DOI 10.1016/S1470-2045(23)00341-8
- Aspartame hazard and risk assessment results released (IARC and WHO/FAO JECFA, 14 July 2023) — news release. WHO / IARC / JECFA. WHO news release 2023