Aspartame, one of the most common artificial sweeteners in the world, is to be declared by the World Health Organization as a possible carcinogen, writes Reuters citing two sources close to the matter.

Aspartame, used in a wide range of products from Coca-Cola to sugar-free chewing gum, will be listed for the first time as a “probable human carcinogen” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in July. The research department of the WHO on this disease, sources inform Reuters.

The IARC decision, which was reportedly taken earlier in June after a meeting of a group of external experts, aims to assess whether or not a substance is a potential hazard based on evidence published in scientific journals.

It also does not cover the amount that can be safely consumed by humans. Recommendations in this sense are developed by a separate WHO commission on the analysis of food additives, JECFA, as well as national regulatory authorities.

Similar past IARC rulings on various substances have raised questions among consumers about their use, led to lawsuits and forced manufacturers to create recipes using alternative compounds.

When will the WHO decision on aspartame be announced?

JECFA, the WHO’s Committee on Food Additives, is also evaluating the potential dangers of aspartane, with its next meeting scheduled for later this month.

Reuters sources say the two commissions will publish their findings on the same day, July 14.

JECFA has declared since 1981 that aspartane is safe for human consumption in certain daily doses.

For example, a 60-pound adult would need to drink 12 to 36 servings of diet soda (depending on how much aspartame it contains) each day to be at risk.

This view has been widely accepted by national regulatory authorities, including in the United States and Europe.

An IARC official said the reports, compiled by the two WHO organizations, were confidential until July, but added that they were “complementary” and “a first step towards understanding carcinogenicity”.

Violent reaction of food industry producers

IARC decisions can have a huge impact.

In 2015, the commission concluded that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic.” Years later, even when other bodies such as the European Food Safety Agency denied it, companies were still feeling the effects of the decision.

Germany’s Bayer has lost its third U.S. appeal against a verdict awarding damages to consumers who claimed they got cancer from the glyphosate herbicide it sold.

But some of the IARC’s past decisions have been criticized for overly worrying consumers about avoiding certain substances or situations.

For example, earlier the commission included working at night and eating red meat in the category of “probably carcinogenic”, and the use of mobile phones – in the category of possible carcinogens, as it would now classify aspartame.

“IARC is not a food safety regulator, and their review of aspartame is not scientifically sound, as it is largely based on widely discredited research,” said Frances Hunt-Wood, secretary general of the International Sweeteners Association.

Other industry sources have already expressed similar sentiments, also expressing “serious concern” about the leak of this information from the WHO.

WHO’s decision on cancer research is based on a large number of studies

Aspartame has been extensively studied for decades. An observational study conducted in France last year involving 100,000 participants found that people who consumed higher amounts of artificial sweeteners, particularly aspartame, had a higher risk of developing cancer.

Another study conducted by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy in the early 2000s concluded that there was a correlation between aspartame and the development of cancer in laboratory mice and rats used for research.

But the first study failed to prove that the substance caused a higher risk of cancer, and the methodology of a study conducted by the French last year has been called into question.

The use of aspartame as an ingredient has been protected for decades by major food and beverage manufacturers.

But according to Reuters sources, the decision, which IARC is due to publish next month, is based on a meta-analysis of 1,300 studies, a huge sample.

Last month, the WHO warned that foods labeled as “zero sugar” or “zero calories” are not the answer for those looking to lose weight, as the use of sweeteners has no long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children.

This decision, in turn, was sharply contested by the producers.