Neotame vs Mineral Oil: which is worse?
Quick answer: Neotame carries the heavier risk profile. Neotame is — in the EU and — in the US; Mineral Oil is — in the EU and — in the US.
| Property | Neotame | Mineral Oil |
|---|---|---|
| EU status | — | — |
| US status | — | — |
| Risk level | — | — |
| Banned in | — | — |
| Restricted in | European Union (ADI 2 mg/kg body weight), Australia, Canada | European Union (E905 restricted to specific applications; extensive ongoing EFSA evaluation of MOSH/MOAH contamination), Australia (restricted levels) |
| Category | additive | additive |
| Where it hides | — | — |
What is Neotame?
Neotame is a synthetic dipeptide sweetener — a derivative of aspartame with a 3,3-dimethylbutyl group added to block aspartame's metabolism, preventing the release of phenylalanine. This means it is safe for people with phenylketonuria (PKU), unlike aspartame. It is approximately 7,000-13,000 times sweeter than sucrose.
What is Mineral Oil?
Mineral oil (E905) is a refined petroleum product used as a food-grade lubricant, coating agent, and glazing agent in food processing and production. Food-grade mineral oil is a highly refined grade of petroleum distillate with specifications limiting impurities. It differs from pharmaceutical-grade (Vaseline) and cosmetic-grade mineral oils in refinement level.
Documented risks
Neotame: Neotame is one of the newer synthetic sweeteners with a shorter safety track record. A 2023 study published in Frontiers in Nutrition found that neotame damaged intestinal epithelial cells in vitro and disrupted the gut microbiome in mice — including reducing beneficial bacteria and increasing bacterial invasion of intestinal cells. The study observed effects at concentrations that could be achievable through high consumption of neotame-containing products. The FDA has set an ADI of 0.3 mg/kg/day, one of the lower sweetener ADIs, reflecting a conservative safety margin. Limited long-term human safety data exist compared to aspartame, acesulfame K, or saccharin, which have been used for decades. EFSA's 2010 opinion found no safety concern at permitted levels. The Frontiers in Nutrition 2023 gut study represents new concerning findings that warrant further investigation.
Mineral Oil: EFSA has raised significant concerns about mineral oil hydrocarbons (MOH) contamination in food through two pathways: (1) deliberate food-grade mineral oil use in coatings and processing, and (2) migration from recycled paper and cardboard food packaging into food. MOH comprises two types: mineral oil saturated hydrocarbons (MOSH), which accumulate in human adipose tissue, liver, and spleen, and mineral oil aromatic hydrocarbons (MOAH), which include polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) that are potentially carcinogenic. A 2011 Swiss study found mineral oil hydrocarbons in human liver and spleen samples from autopsy, demonstrating real bioaccumulation. EFSA's 2023 preliminary opinion identified MOAH contamination in food as a safety concern that cannot be dismissed, recommending ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) minimization. Untreated and mildly treated mineral oils are IARC Group 1 human carcinogens for occupational inhalation. Highly refined food-grade mineral oil (E905) is not classified as a direct carcinogen, but MOAH contamination in even food-grade mineral oil is an ongoing concern.
Scan a barcode and we'll flag both Neotame and Mineral Oil (plus 200+ other ingredients banned overseas).
Scan free →