Assize Index

Azúcares y edulcorantes

Aspartamo

GI(Glucose = 100)

Principal · 0 GI

High-intensity sweeteners — no available carbohydrate for classical GI (2020)

Energy(kcal/100g)

Principal · 0 kcal/100g

High-intensity sweeteners — no available carbohydrate for classical GI (2020)

Carbs(g/100g)

Principal · 0 g/100g

High-intensity sweeteners — no available carbohydrate for classical GI (2020)

Sugars(g/100g)

Principal · 0 g/100g

High-intensity sweeteners — no available carbohydrate for classical GI (2020)

Beneficios funcionales

Todavía no hay minerales citados ni otras notas funcionales.

Los minerales citados pueden sumar hasta +2 en El mejor endulzante para el día a día — ver Methods.

Riesgos y efectos secundarios

  • Fenilalanina (PKU)

    caution

    FDA labeling requirement. Avoid if you have PKU. Not scored — it matters only to people with phenylketonuria, a rare inherited condition, for whom the answer is avoid, not a few points.

    FDA — Aspartame and other sweeteners in food (PKU labeling) (2023)

  • IARC grupo 2B

    caution

    Possibly carcinogenic (limited evidence in humans, for liver cancer). JECFA reaffirmed ADI 0–40 mg/kg bw; dietary exposure within ADI not a health concern. Not scored on its own — a hazard class (could it cause cancer at some dose), not a risk estimate. The cancer signal below scores the human cohort link; IARC's liver-cancer evidence is why that signal also applies on Easy on the liver.

    WHO — IARC Group 2B + JECFA ADI reaffirmation for aspartame (joint release) (2023)

  • Relación con cáncer (cohorte)

    note

    PLOS Medicine 2022 NutriNet-Santé (102,865 adults): overall cancer HR 1.15 (1.03–1.28) for higher consumers vs non-consumers; breast cancer HR 1.22. Observational association, not proof of cause; JECFA (2023) found the evidence not convincing and kept the ADI. Scored: cancer signal −7 on every list, Easy on the liver included (synthetics are not on Diabetic-friendly).

    Debras et al. — Artificial sweeteners and cancer risk: NutriNet-Santé cohort (PLOS Medicine) (2022)

  • Desencadenante de dolor de cabeza / migraña (subgrupo sensible)

    note

    RCT in self-identified susceptible adults: more headache-days on aspartame than placebo. Not proven for everyone. FDA AERS reports are surveillance noise, not causal proof. Not scored — shown only in a self-selected sensitive subset.

    Van Den Eeden et al. — Aspartame ingestion and headaches, randomized crossover (Neurology) (1994)

  • OMS: no para controlar el peso

    caution

    WHO 2023, conditional (low certainty): not for weight control or lowering disease risk — no long-term body-fat benefit. Not a safety ruling. Scored: the energy points it earns over sucrose are taken back on Everyday Health, Weight goals and Easy on the liver; not on Diabetic-friendly (WHO excludes people with diabetes).

    WHO — Use of non-sugar sweeteners: WHO guideline (2023)

  • Relación con enfermedad cerebrovascular (cohorte)

    note

    BMJ 2022 NutriNet-Santé (103,388 adults): HR 1.17 (1.03–1.33). Observational association, not proof of cause. Scored: CV signal −7 on Everyday Health and Weight goals (synthetics are not on Diabetic-friendly; not on Easy on the liver), once per sweetener however many links.

    Debras et al. — Artificial sweeteners and risk of cardiovascular diseases: NutriNet-Santé cohort (BMJ) (2022)

No es consejo médico. Las penalizaciones publicadas, cuando existen, se explican en Cómo puntuamos y no representan una escala clínica de gravedad.

Notas

  • No cited functional-benefit mechanism beyond intense sweetness on this row. WHO/IARC 2023 hazard classification (Group 2B, limited evidence) is already listed under Risks; JECFA kept the ADI unchanged.

    Editorial honesty note. Do not extend IARC 2B to other intense sweeteners without their own cites.

    WHO — IARC Group 2B + JECFA ADI reaffirmation for aspartame (joint release) (2023)

Las notas explican lo que el eje abierto o las etiquetas de riesgo por sí solos no muestran; no es consejo médico.

Una celda vacía indica que aún no disponemos de una fuente que describa el método. El primer puesto responde a la regla publicada, no a un veredicto médico.