评论
打印
Then came aspartame, the sweetener that, more than any other, gave rise to the sugar-free foodscape of today.
然后是阿斯巴甜，这种甜味剂比其他任何甜味剂都更能推动今天无糖食品的发展。
As Carolyn de la Pea explains in her excellent 2010 history of sweeteners, Empty Pleasures, aspartame was the first sweetener that could be used to create diet drinks “with no bitter aftertaste and no calories”.
卡洛琳·德·拉·皮亚在210年关于甜味剂的辉煌历史中解释道，阿斯巴甜是第一种可以用来制作无糖饮料的甜味剂，“回味不苦，没有热量”。
By 2005, it was being used in more than 6,000 food and drink products around the world, including Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi.
到2005年，阿斯巴甜被用于全球6000多种食品和饮料产品中，包括健怡可乐和健怡百事可乐。
Over the past 20 years or more, doubts have circulated about the safety of aspartame, with several studies from the Ramazzini Institute in Italy, published between 2006 and 2010, showing that the substance causes malignant tumours in rats and mice.
在过去的20多年里，人们对阿斯巴甜的安全性一直存在质疑。意大利拉玛兹尼研究所在2006年至2010年间发表的几项研究表明，这种物质会导致大鼠与小鼠患上恶性肿瘤。
In 2013, however, the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) conducted an assessment of aspartame in humans and concluded that it was safe for the general population, including infants, children and pregnant women.
然而，2013年，欧洲食品安全局对阿斯巴甜在人类中的使用进行了评估，并得出结论，阿斯巴甜对包括婴儿、儿童和孕妇在内的一般人群是安全的。
The EFSA sets “acceptable daily intakes” or ADIs, which are the maximum amount of sweeteners considered “safe” to consume.
欧洲食品安全管理局规定了“每日摄取容许量”，即，甜味剂最大“安全”摄入量。
In order to exceed the daily limit for aspartame, an adult weighing 60kg would have to consume somewhere between 12 and 36 cans of fizzy diet drink per day.
为超出阿斯巴甜的每日限量，一个体重60公斤的成年人必须每天喝12到36罐无糖碳酸饮料。
Some scientists, such as Erik Millstone at the University of Sussex, remain sceptical.
一些科学家，如苏塞克斯大学的埃里克·米尔斯通，仍然对此持怀疑态度。
When we spoke recently, Millstone argued that lobbying and research funding by the food industry has played a powerful role in downplaying the potential risks of sweeteners, including aspartame, smoothing their path to regulatory approval.
在我们最近的谈话中，米尔斯顿认为，食品行业的游说和研究资助在淡化包括阿斯巴甜在内的甜味剂的潜在风险方面发挥了强大的作用，为它们获得监管批准铺平了道路。
A 2016 “review of reviews” noted that “Artificial sweetener industry-sponsored reviews [of the effects of sweeteners] were more likely to have favourable results than non-industry-sponsored reviews” and found that there was a high risk of bias in these studies.
2016年的一份“评论回顾 ”指出，“业界资助的关于甜味剂影响的评论比非业界资助的评论更有可能获得有利结果”，并发现这些研究存在较高的偏倚风险。
The sweetener industry – which, as of November 2022, was worth $2.1bn globally – spends a fortune on lobbying and PR to reassure consumers that sweeteners are safe.
截至2022年11月，全球价值21亿美元的甜味剂行业在游说和公关方面投入了大量资金，让消费者相信甜味剂是安全的。
From 2010 to 2015, Coca-Cola donated more than $1.7m to the Calorie Control Council (CCC), a trade body.
从2010年到2015年，可口可乐向卡路里控制委员会(贸易组织)捐赠了170多万美元。
In 2013, the then president of the CCC wrote to Purdue University to complain about one of Susan Swithers’ review articles, which had laid out the evidence to date that sweeteners may raise the risk of weight gain and diabetes.
2013年，当时的卡路里控制委员会主席写信给普渡大学，对苏珊·斯威瑟斯的一篇综述文章提出了控诉，该文章列出了迄今为止表明甜味剂可能会增加体重和糖尿病风险的证据。
The CCC demanded that Purdue stop “promoting biased science”.
该委员会要求普渡大学停止“推广有偏见的科学”。
Swithers referred to this as “intimidation tactics” and noted that her paper was peer-reviewed.
斯威瑟斯将之称为“恐吓战术”，并指出她的论文经过了同行评议。
