Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk Communication, Media Amplification and the Aspartame Scare

  • Article
  • Published:
Risk Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

On 14 July 2005, the Ramazzini Foundation held a press conference on the cancer risks posed by the sweetener aspartame, which received worldwide media attention. Scientists at the Ramazzini Foundation found that when administered to rats for their entire life span, aspartame, an artificial sweetener used in more than 6,000 food and pharmaceutical products, induces an increase in lymphomas and leukaemias in female rats. This study showed that aspartame causes cancer and was published online in the Foundation's in-house journal European Journal of Oncology. After a second publication on aspartame by the same institute, a number of scientists and European regulators started to question the validity of Ramazzini's findings. Events culminated following the publication of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) expert opinion on 5 May 2006 and the resulting press conference in Rome where the Authority announced that the Ramazzini study was problematic. It pointed out:

  • The slight increase in cancers known as lymphomas and leukaemias in the treated rats was considered to be unrelated to the aspartame treatment, and most likely attributed to the high background incidence of inflammatory changes in the lung.

  • There was no dose–response relationship with respect to increasing doses of aspartame.

  • With regard to the malignant tumours of the peripheral nerves, the numbers of tumours were low with no clear dose–response relationship over a wide dose range.

  • The (cancer) findings in the kidney, ureter and bladder, observed mainly in female rats, were not specific to aspartame.

This paper evaluates the communication and active social amplification of Ramazzini's research on aspartame, from the time of Ramazzini's initial press conference to the time of EFSA's press conference, and is based on interviews with relevant regulators (most notably EFSA), scientists, stakeholders (industrialists, consumer representatives) and the media. The findings of the study note that the communication strategies used by the Ramazzini Foundation were not transparent, were focused on sensationalizing the results, were used to actively mislead the media and did not meet proper risk communication criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Daily Express corrected themselves and apologized on 1 August 2006.

References

  • AFSSA (2002). Assessment Report: Opinion on a Possible Link Between Exposition to Aspartame and the Incidence of Brain Tumours in Humans. Paris: AFSSA.

  • Aspartame Information (2006). For Brighton Evening Argus, 16th January, pp 10–11.

  • Aspartame Information (2007). Aspartame Information Service responds to the Ecologist. Available at www.aspartame.info/mediaarch/medit056.html, accessed on 27 June 2007.

  • Atkin, C. and Wallack, L. eds (1990). Mass Communication and Public Health: Complexities and Conflicts. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badaracco Jr., J.L. (1985). Loading the Dice: A Five Country Study of Vinyl Chloride Regulation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belpoggi, F. (2007). Expert Report of Fiorella Belpoggi. Re MTBE Products Liability Litigation-United States District Court Southern District of New York, County of Suffolk and Suffolk Water Authority v. Amerada Hess Corp et al., 04Civ 5424, United Water New York Inc vs Amerada Hess Corp et al., 04 Civ.2389. 11 June.

  • Bostrom, A. and Lofstedt, R.E. (2003). Communicating Risks: Wireless and Hardwired. Risk Analysis. Vol. 23, pp 241–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, A. (2004). Cellular Phones, Public Fears and A Culture of Precaution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockburn, A. (2007). Rumsfeld: His Rise, Fall and Catastrophic Legacy. New York: Scribner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies, C. (2006). Parliamentary Question on Aspartame, www.europarl.europa.eu/omk/sipade3?PUBREF=-//EP//TEXT+WQ+E-2006-1113+0+DOC=XML+VO//EN&L=EN&LEVEL=2&NAV=S&LSTDOC=Y, accessed 23 March 2007.

  • Downs, J.S., Murray, P.J., Bruine de Bruin, W., White, J.P., Palmgren, C. and Fischhoff, B. (2004a). An Interactive Video Programme to Reduce Adolescent Females' STD Risk: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Social Science and Medicine. Vol. 59, pp 1561–1572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, J.S., Bruine de Bruin, W., Murray, P.J. and Fischhoff, B. (2004b). When ‘it Only Takes Once’ Fails: Perceived Infertility Predicts Condom use and STI Acquisition. Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. Vol. 17, p 224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EFSA (2006c). Written Question E-2340/06 Aspartame Ramazzini Study. Letter from the Catherine Geslain-Laneelle [Executive Director] to Hiltrud Breyer MEP, 26 July.

  • European Food Law Weekly (2006a). EFSA Aspartame Panel Under Scrutiny. 28 April.

  • European Food Law Weekly (2006b). Geslain-Lanelle Defends EFSA Position on Aspartame to Green MEP. 1 September.

  • European Food Law Weekly (2006c). MEPs Voice Concern over EFSA Aspartame Opinion. 6 October.

  • European Food Law Weekly (2007). MEP Slams EFSA for Using Industry Experts on Aspartame. 26 January.

  • European Food Safety Authority (2005a). Press Release: EFSA Urges the Ramazzini Institute to Release Data on Aspartame. 29 November.

  • European Food Safety Authority (2005b). Press Release: Aspartame: EFSA Receives Data Requested from the Ramazzini Institute. Scientific experts to start the evaluation, 19 December.

  • European Food Safety Authority (2006a). Press Release: EFSA Assesses New Aspartame Study and Reconfirms its Safety. 5 May.

  • European Food Safety Authority (2006b). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in contact with Food (AFC) on a request from the Commission Related to a New Long-term Carcinogenicity Study on Aspartame. Question number EFSA-Q-2005-112. The EFSA Journal. Vol. 356, pp 1–44.

  • European Union-Scientific Committee for Food (1985). Sweeteners. Reports of the Scientific Committee for Food (Sixteenth Series), EUR 10210 EN. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities.

  • European Union-Scientific Committee for Food (1989). Report of the Scientific Committee for Food (Twenty-first series), EUR 11617 EN. Luxembourg: Commission of the European Communities.

  • European Union-Scientific Committee for Food (2002). Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food: Update on the Safety of Aspartame. Brussels: DG SANCO-Scientific Committee on Food.

  • Fischhoff, B. (1989). Appendix C. Risk: A Guide to Controversy. In National Research Council (eds) Improving Risk Communication. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. (1995). Risk Perception and Communication Unplugged: Twenty Years of Progress. Risk Analysis. Vol. 15, pp 137–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. (1996). Public Values in Risk Research. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Vol. 545, pp 75–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. (1999). Why (Cancer) Risk Communication can be Hard. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Vol. 25, pp 7–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. (2007). Risk Perception and Communication. In Detels, R., Beaglehole, R., Lansang, M.A. and Gulliford M. (eds) Oxford Textbook of Public Health, 5th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A. and Quadrel, M.J. (2002). Risk Perception and Communication. In Detels, R., McEwen, J., Beaglehole, R. and Tanaka, H. (eds.) Oxford Text Book on Public Health. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flamm, W.G. (1997). Increasing Brain Tumour Rates. Is there a Link to aspartame? Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. Vol. 56, pp 105–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flint, C. (2005). Response to Williams Speech. 14 December. London: House of Commons.

  • Food and Drug Administration (2007a). FDA Reaffirms Aspartame is not a Carcinogen. FDA website, 24 April.

  • FDA (2007b). FDA Proposes New, Tougher Procedures for Membership on Advisory Committees. Rockville, MD: FDA.

  • Food Magazine (2006). Sweet and Sour: The Unanswered Questions about Aspartame. Issue 73, April–June.

  • Fox, M. (2007). US FDA Says Unmoved by Aspartame/Cancer Report, Reuters, 25 June.

  • Friedman, S.H., Dunwoody, S. and Rogers, C.L. (eds) (1999). Communicating Uncertainty: Media Coverage of New and Controversial Science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallus, S., Scotti, L., Negri, E., Talamini, R., Franceschi, S., Montella, M., Giacosa, A., Dal Maso, L. and La Vecchia, C. (2007). Artificial Sweeteners and Cancer Risk in a Network of Case-control Studies. Avaliable at http://annonc.oxfordjournals.org.cgi/content/abstract/18/1/40?, accessed 27 June 2007.

  • Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Bauer, M., Durant, J., Allansdottir, A., Bonfadelli, H., Boy, D., de Cheveigne, S., Fjaestad, B., Gutteling, J.M., Hampel, J., Jelsoe, E., Jesuino, J.C., Kohring, M., Kronbeger, N., Midden, C., Nielsen, T.H., Prestalski, A., Rusanen, T., Sakellaris, G., Torgersen, H., Twardowski, T. and Wagner, W. (2000). Biotechnology and the European Public. Nature Biotechnology. Vol. 18, pp 935–938.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskell, G., Allum, N., Wagner, W., Kronberger, N., Torgensen, H. and Bardes, J. (2004). GM Foods and the Misperception of Risk Perception. Risk Analysis. Vol. 24, pp 185–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaskell, G., Bauer, M.W. and Durrant, J. (1998). Public Perceptions of Biotechnology in 1996: Eurobarometer 46.1. In Durant, J., Bauer, M.W. and Gaskell, G. (eds) Biotechnology in the Public Sphere: A European Source Book. London: Cornwell Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurney, J.G., Pogoda, J.M., Holly, E.A., Hecht, S.S. and Martin-Prston, S. (1997). Aspartame Consumption in Relation to Childhood Brain Tumour Risk: Results from a Case-control Study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Vol. 89, pp 1072–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hailey, J.R. (2004). Pathology Working Group Chairperson's Report: Lifetime Study in Rats Conducted by the Ramazzini Foundation. Submitted to Dr. Belpoggi, 30 November.

  • Hargreaves, I., Lewis, J. and Boyce, T. (2003). Towards a Better Map: Science, the Public and the Media. Swindon: ESRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrabin, R., Coote, A. and Allen, J. (2003). Health in the News: Risk, Reporting and Media Influence. London: King's Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, R. (2004). MMR Science and Fiction: Exploring the Vaccine Crisis. London: Granta.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huff, J. (2002). Chemical Studies and Evaluated in Long-Term Carcinogenisis Bioassays by both the Ramazzini Foundation and the National Toxicology Program. In Tribute to Cesare Maltoni and David Rall. Annals of New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 982, pp 208–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, J.S. (1999). Sweet Poison: How the World's Most Popular Artificial Sweetener is Killing Us-My Story. Fair Hills, NJ: New Horizon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, J. (2006). European Ramazzini Foundation Stands Behind Aspartame Study Results, www.sweetpoison.com, accessed 8 January 2007.

  • Hutton, D. and Wadge, A. (2006). Oral Evidence. In House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (eds) Scientific Evidence, Risk and Evidence Based Policy Making, Volume ll-Evidence. London: Stationary Office, pp Ev 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, J.X., Kasperson, R.E., Pidgeon, N. and Slovic, P. (2003). The Social Amplification of Risk: Assessing Fifteen Years of Research and Theory. In Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R.E. and Slovic, P. (eds) The Social Amplification of Risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 13–46.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kasperson, R.E., Renn, O., Slovic, P., Brown, H.S., Emel, J., Goble, R., Kasperson, J.X. and Ratick, S. (1988). The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework. Risk Analysis. Vol. 8, pp 177–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjaernes, U. (2006). Trust and Distrust: Cognitive Decisions or Social Relations? Journal of Risk Research. Vol. 9, pp 911–932.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koestner, A. (1997). Increasing Brain Tumour Rates: Is There a Link to Aspartame? Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. Vol. 56, pp 107–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, F. (2005a). Fresh Fears Raised about Aspartame: Manufacturers Dispute Study into Lab Rats Fed Sweetener. Guardian, 15 July, p 7.

  • Lawrence, F. (2005b). Food Safety: Sweetener Manufacturer Disputes Validity of New Health Research: Study Links Aspartame with Cancer. Guardian, 30 September, p 7.

  • Lawrence, F. (2005c). Safety of Artificial Sweetener Called into Question by MP. Guardian, 15 December, p 7.

  • Lawrence, F. (2006). Food Safety Authority Says Aspartame not Linked to Cancer. Guardian, 15 May.

  • Leiss, W. (2001). In the Chamber of Risks: Understanding Risk Controversies. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lim, U., Subar, A.M., Mouw, T., Hartge, P., Morton, L.M., Stolzenberg, R.S., Campbell, D., Hollenbeck, A.R. and Schatzin, A. (2006). Consumption of Aspartame Containing Beverages and Incidence of Hematopoietic and Brain Malignancies. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention. Vol. 15, pp 1654–1659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lister, S. (2006). Sweetener is not a Cancer risk. The Times, 6 May, p 14.

  • Lofstedt, R.E. (2003). Science Communication and the Swedish Acrylamide ‘Alarm’. Journal of Health Communication. Vol. 8, pp 407–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lofstedt, R.E. (2005). Risk Management in Post Trust Societies. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lofstedt, R.E. (2006). How can we Make Food Risk Communication Better? Where are we and where are we Going? Journal of Risk research. Vol. 9, No. 8, pp 869–890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lofstedt, R.E. (2007). An Academic Analysis of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) Report, The Future of Drug Safety, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Response – in a Risk Communication Context. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Lofstedt, R.E. and Renn, O. (1997). The Brent Spar Controversy: An Example of Risk Communication Gone Wrong. Risk Analysis. Vol. 17, pp 131–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovett, R. (2006). The Healthy Opinion? New Scientist, 6 May.

  • Lurie, P., Almeida, C.M., Stine, N., Stine, A.R. and Wolfe, S.M. (2006). Financial Conflict of Interest Disclosure and Voting Patterns at Food and Drug Administration Drug Advisory Committee meetings. JAMA. Vol. 295, No. 16, pp 1921–1928.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macfarlane, J. (2006). Experts in Cancer warning U-turn. Daily Express, 6 May, p 8.

  • Maltoni, C. (1974). Oncogenicity Bioassays of Vinyl Chloride: Plan, Current Results and Perspectives. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Sympoisum of Medichem on Chromosome Aberrations by Industrial Chemicals and Vinyl Chloride Toxicity. Milano, Italy, pp 65–79.

  • Maltoni, C., LeFemine, G., Ciliberti, A., Cotti, G. and Carretti, D. (1984). Experimental Research on Vinyl Chloride Carcinogenisis. In Maltoni, C. and Mehlman, M.A. (eds) Archives of Research on Industrial Carcinogenisis, Vol. 2. Princeton: Princeton Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maltoni, C., LeFemine, G. and Cotti, G. et al. (1985). Experimental Research on Vinylidene Chloride Carcinogenisis. In Maltoni C. and Mehlman M.A. (eds) Archives of Research on Industrial Carcinogenisis. Vol. 3 Princeton: Princeton Scientific Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • McComas, K.A. (2006). Defining Moments in Risk Communication Research, 1996–2005. Journal of Health Communication. Vol. 11, No. 1, pp 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercola, J. and Pearsall, K.D. (2006). Sweet Deception: Why Splenda, Nutra Sweet, and the FDA may be Hazardous to Your Health. Nashville, TN: Nelson Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (1989). Improving Risk Communication. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

  • National Research Council (NRC) (1994). Science and Judgement in Risk Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy press.

  • New York Times (2006). The Safety of Aspartame. 21 February.

  • Nowotny, H., Gibbon, M. and Scott, P. (2001). Rethinking Science, Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olney, J.W., Farber, N.B., Spitznagel, E. and Robins, L.N. (1996). Increasing Brain Tumor Rates: Is There a Link to Aspartame? Journal of Neuropathology and Experimental Neurology. Vol. 55, pp 1115–1123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pidgeon, N., Kasperson, R.E. and Slovic, P. (eds) (2003). The Social Amplification of Risk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pisa, N. (2006). Sweetener Cleared of Cancer Risk. Daily Mail, 6 May, p 13.

  • Popper, K.R. (1963). Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, D. and Leiss, W. (1997). Mad Cows and Mother's Milk: The Perils of Poor Risk Communication. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poulter, S. (2005). Sweetener's ‘link to cancer’ denied. Daily Mail, 15 July.

  • Price, T. (2005). Crippled Girl Walks Again After Giving Up Sweetener. Daily Express, 17 December, p 26.

  • Price, T. and Guyoncourt, S. (2005). Cancer Linked to Sweetener. Daily Express, 15 December, p 1.

  • Ramazzini Foundation (2005). 35 Years of Research in Cancer Prevention. Bologna: Ramazzini Foundation.

  • Ramazzini Foundation (2006). Press Release. European Ramazzini Foundation Stands Behind Aspartame Study, Announces Ongoing Research on Artificial Sweeteners. 5 May, accessed 8 January 2007.

  • Renn, O. and Levine, D. (1991). Credibility and Trust in Risk Communication. In Kasperson, R.E. and Stallen, P.J. (eds) Communicating Risks to the Public: International Perspectives. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renwick, A.G. and Nordmann, H. (2007). First European Conference on Aspartame: Putting Safety and Benefits into Perspective. Synopsis of Presentations and Conclusions. Food and Chemical Toxicology. Vol. 45, pp 1308–1313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of Risk. Science. Vol. 236, pp 280–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (2000). The Perception of Risk. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC) and the Amsterdam School of Communications Research (2006). MESSENGER: Media, science and society: Engagement and governance in Europe. Oxford: SIRC.

  • Soffritti, M. (2006). Acesulfame Potassium: Soffritti Responds. Environmental Health Policy, 1 August.

  • Soffritti, M. (2007). The Carcinogenicity of Aspartame: The Lessons that We Still Must Learn. Press conference held at the Mount Sinai Medical School, New York, 23 April.

  • Soffritti, M., Maltoni, C., Maffei, F. and Biagi, R. (1989). Formaldehyde: An experimental Multipotent Carcinogen. Toxicological Industrial Health. Vol. 5, pp 699–730.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Cevolani, D., Guarino, M., Padovani, M. and Maltoni, C. (2002a). Results of Long-term Experimental Studies on the Carcinogenicity of Methyl Alcohol and Ethyl Alcohol in Rats. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 982, pp 46–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Lambertini, L., Lauriola, M., Padovani, M. and Maltoni, C. (2002b). Results of Long-Term Experimental Studies on the Carcinogenicity of Formaldehyde and Acetaldhyde in Rats. Annals of New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 982, pp 87–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Minardi, F. and Maltoni, C. (2002c). Ramazzini Foundation Cancer Program: History and Major Projects, Life-Span Carcinogenicity Bioassay Design, Chemicals Studied and Results. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 982, pp 26–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Esposti, D.D. and Lambertini, L. (2005). Aspartame Induces Lymphomas and Leukaemias in Rats. European Journal of Oncology. Vol. 10, pp 107–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Delgi Esposti, D., Lambertini, L., Tibaldi, E. and Rigano, A. (2006). First Experimental Demonstration of the Multipotential Carcinogenic Effects of Aspartame Administered in the Feed to Sprague–Dawley Rats. Environmental Health Perspctives. Vol. 114, pp 379–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soffritti, M., Belpoggi, F., Tibaldi, E., Esposti, D.D. and Lauriola, M. (2007). Lifespan Exposure to Low Doses of Aspartame Beginning During Prenatal Life Increases Cancer Effects in Rats. Environmental Health Perspectives. Vol.115, No.9, pp 1293–1297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UK Committee on Carcinogenicity (UK CC) (2006). Statement on a carcinogenicity study of aspartame by the European Ramazzini Foundation. London: UK Committee on Carcinogenicity COC/06/S2.

  • US General Accounting Office (GAO) (1987). Food And Drug Administration: Food additive approval process followed for aspartame. Washington, DC: US GAO.

  • Walton, R.G. (1996). Survey of Aspartame Studies: Correlation of Outcome and Funding Sources. Youngstown, Ohio: Center for Behavioral Medicine, Northside Medical Centre.

  • Warner, M. (2006). New Research, New Fears About a Sweetener's Risks. New York Times, 12 February, p 1.

  • Williams, R. (2005). Speech on Artificial Sweeteners. Given in the House of Commons, 14 December.

Download references

Acknowledgements

I am indebted to the following people who have either provided me with information or commented on earlier versions of this paper: Asa Boholm, Frederic Bouder, Baruch Fischhoff, Andrew Jack, Judy Larkin, Sam Luoma, Andrea Oates, Ortwin Renn, Anne-Katrine Schlag, Laura Smilie, Marjorlein van Asselt, as well as officials at the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), DG SANCO, the Swedish Food Administration, the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA), the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Coca Cola Corporation and the International Sweeteners Association (ISA). The research on which this article is based was funded by the European Food Information Council (EUFIC) and the US National Petrochemical and Refiners Association.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. King's Centre for Risk Management, King's College London, London, UK

    Ragnar E Lofstedt

Authors
  1. Ragnar E Lofstedt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ragnar E Lofstedt.

Additional information

Conflict of interest: Professor Lofstedt is a member of Coca Cola Corporation's Science and Regulatory Affairs scientific advisory board.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lofstedt, R. Risk Communication, Media Amplification and the Aspartame Scare. Risk Manag 10, 257–284 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/rm.2008.11

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/rm.2008.11

Keywords

Search

Navigation