Are sweeteners carcinogenic? Fact-checking

Are sweeteners carcinogenic? The short answer: based on current scientific knowledge, none of the sweeteners authorised in Germany pose a clear cancer risk. This is how the Cancer Information Service of the German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ) summarises the situation. This fact-check explains why there are still repeated headlines – about aspartame, sucralose or erythritol.

The result at a glance

Aspartame: What ‘possibly carcinogenic’ means

The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classifies substances according to the strength of the evidence for a cancer risk – not according to how high the risk is at a particular dose. The groups, according to the Cancer Information Service:

• Group 1: There is sufficient scientific evidence of a cancer risk.
• Group 2A: limited evidence from human studies, but sufficient evidence from animal studies or regarding the mechanism of action.
• Group 2B: only limited evidence from human studies, or clear indications derived solely from animal studies or investigations into the mechanism of action.
• Group 3: No conclusion can be drawn.

In 2023, aspartame was classified as Group 2B – as were, according to the Cancer Information Service, aloe vera extract and Asian pickled vegetables. The joint expert committee of the WHO and FAO (JECFA) saw no reason to change the ADI of 40 mg per kg of body weight: An adult weighing 70 kg would have to drink more than 9 to 14 cans of a drink containing 200 to 300 mg of aspartame a day to exceed this limit. In September 2026, the EFSA concluded that the available data do not support a causal link between current aspartame intake and cancer. Compared with risk factors such as smoking or red meat, the carcinogenic effect of aspartame is, according to the Cancer Information Service, significantly less well established.

The NutriNet-Santé study: a correlation, not proof

Many headlines stem from a French observational study conducted in 2022. Researchers analysed data from 102,865 adults over an average period of 7.8 years. Those who consumed more artificial sweeteners than the average consumer had a 13 per cent higher risk of cancer overall than people who did not consume sweeteners; for aspartame, the figure was 15 per cent, and for acesulfame K, 13 per cent.

The authors themselves highlight the limitations: possible bias in the selection of participants, unaccounted-for confounding factors and reverse causality. An observational study shows a link, but does not prove that the sweetener is the cause. The researchers view their findings as a contribution to the ongoing re-evaluation of food additives.

Sucralose: three headlines, three interpretations

• The assessment: The EFSA re-evaluated sucralose in February 2026. The ADI of 15 mg per kg of body weight remains unchanged; estimated intake was below this level in all population groups.
• Heating: It is unclear whether, during prolonged heating at high temperatures, chlorine from sucralose is transferred to other molecules. This also applies to baking or frying at home. In the context of authorised uses in industrial processing, the EFSA does not anticipate such conditions. It therefore did not approve a proposed extension to include fine bakery products.
• Sucralose-6-acetate: In 2023, US researchers found in laboratory experiments that sucralose-6-acetate, an intermediate product and impurity resulting from the manufacturing process, can damage DNA. In commercial samples, the concentration was as high as 0.67 per cent. These were cell and tissue experiments, not studies involving humans.
• Immunotherapy: A study from 2025 found, in mice and in patients with advanced cancer, that sucralose consumption was associated with a poorer response to certain immunotherapies. This relates to the effectiveness of a treatment, not to whether sucralose causes cancer.

Erythritol: no evidence of genetic damage

In its re-evaluation of 20 December 2023, the EFSA classified erythritol (E 968) as non-genotoxic and, due to its laxative effect, set an ADI of 0.5 g per kg of body weight per day. You can find out how this sugar substitute is produced and read the EFSA’s further comments on our page about erythritol.

Saccharin: an old suspicion, re-examined

The previous ADI for saccharin was based on bladder tumours observed in rat studies. According to the EFSA, there is now scientific consensus that these tumours occur only in male rats and are not relevant to humans. In 2024, the EFSA therefore raised the ADI from 5 to 9 mg per kg of body weight.

What you can take away from this

• Normal amounts: According to the Cancer Information Service, based on current knowledge, aspartame can continue to be consumed in normal amounts.
• Keeping an eye on the amount: Each sweetener has its own ADI – you can find an overview of all the values in our article ‘Sweetener Overview’.
• Heating at home: The EFSA identifies unresolved issues regarding potential breakdown products when baking and frying with sucralose.
• Phenylketonuria: According to the EFSA, people with PKU should not consume foods containing aspartame.

Our cans contain no sweeteners. This is a matter of taste and not a judgement on sweeteners – as things stand, there is no clear evidence that authorised sweeteners pose a cancer risk. The reason why we still choose to produce our products no sugar or sweetener is explained in the article ‘Sugar-free no sweetener’; details of what’s in ‘light’ and ‘zero’ drinks can be found in the article ‘Zero drinks’.

This fact check is not a substitute for medical advice. Doctors at the Cancer Information Service are available to answer questions about cancer free of charge on 0800 420 30 40, every day from 8 am to 8 pm.

Frequently Asked Questions

Sources

1. Re-evaluation of erythritol (E 968) as a food additive | EFSA (efsa.europa.eu, 20 December 2023), accessed on 28 October 2026. efsa.europa.eu
2. Re-evaluation of erythritol (E 968) as a food additive – PMC (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov), accessed on 28 October 2026. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
3. ACQUA REAPER: Product labels, 07–08/26.
4. Cancer Information Service, German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ): Healthy eating – preventing cancer: Food additives and sweeteners, accessed 16 September 2026. krebsinformationsdienst.de
5. Cancer Information Service, German Cancer Research Centre (DKFZ): Sweetener aspartame ‘possibly carcinogenic’, 20 July 2023. krebsinformationsdienst.de
6. World Health Organisation (WHO), IARC, JECFA: Results of the hazard and risk assessment of aspartame published, 14 July 2023. who.int
7. EFSA (Plain Language Summary; EFSA Journal doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10259): Re-evaluation of the salt of aspartame-acesulfame (E 962) as a food additive, 10 September 2026. efsa.europa.eu
8. EFSA (Plain Language Summary): Re-evaluation of sucralose (E 955) as a food additive, 16 February 2026. efsa.europa.eu
9. EFSA Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF): Re-evaluation of erythritol (E 968) as a food additive, EFSA Journal 2023, 20 December 2023. doi.org
10. EFSA (Plain Language Summary): Re-evaluation of saccharin and its sodium, potassium and calcium salts (E 954) as food additives, 15 November 2024. efsa.europa.eu
11. PLoS Medicine (Debras C, Chazelas E, Srour B et al.): Artificial sweeteners and cancer risk: Results from the NutriNet-Santé population-based cohort study, 24 March 2022. doi.org
12. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B (Schiffman SS, Scholl EH, Furey TS, Nagle HT): Toxicological and pharmacokinetic properties of sucralose-6-acetate and its parent compound sucralose: in vitro screening assays, 29 May 23. doi.org
13. Cancer Discovery (Morder KM, Nguyen M, Wilfahrt DN et al.): Sucralose Consumption Ablates Cancer Immunotherapy Response through Microbiome Disruption, 3 November 2025. doi.org
14. Consumer Advice Centre: Sweeteners: What are sweeteners and sugar substitutes?, as at 26 June 25. verbraucherzentrale.de