What role does ‘anecdotal evidence’ play in science? Truly anecdotal evidence is not evidence in the scientific sense, it's observation, it’s often subjective, and the effects seen may be due to a number of factors all varying at the same time. Observation can help us towards understanding certain issues, but is a first step towards a testable hypothesis, not an end in itself.
Therefore, anecdotal reports do sometimes deserve closer examination, especially when a number of unrelated people are reporting similar things. As a science based organisation, the Agency pays close attention to scientific evidence, but sometimes the anecdotal reports we receive are persistent enough to make us feel we need to take a closer look at people’s concerns.
This is the case with a pilot study we are starting today, which looks at the artificial sweetener aspartame. Some people have reported bad reactions after consuming food and drink containing this additive. The reactions include headaches and upset stomachs.
Numerous pieces of research and risk assessments over the years have shown that aspartame can be consumed safely, but the reports of bad reactions persist. Given this continuing anecdotal evidence, we feel it’s appropriate to see if we can find out more about why people report these effects.
To do this, our pilot study will focus specifically on those people who have reported bad reactions. Results from this work will be used to inform the design and feasibility of a proposed study led by the European Food Safety Authority.
If you have experienced bad reactions and would like to take part in the study, then please contact the Agency though the following address: aspartame@foodstandards.gsi.gov.uk
This does not, however, change our general advice on aspartame. We are confident it can be consumed safely and we are not recommending any changes to its current use.