As the government reviews its strategies, stakeholders urge swift action. With NCDs claiming thousands of lives annually, the artificial sweetener surge serves as a wake-up call: effective regulation must evolve with industry tactics.

In a bid to combat the rising tide of non-communicable diseases (NCDs), Sri Lanka’s government has implemented stringent sugar-reduction policies, but these measures have inadvertently triggered a surge in the use of artificial sweeteners, according to a recent analysis by the Colombo-based Institute of Policy Studies (IPS). Experts warn that while the policies aim to curb excessive sugar intake, they have created loopholes that allow manufacturers to substitute sugar with non-sugar sweeteners (NSS), potentially misleading consumers and posing long-term health risks.

The IPS report, authored by Research Economist Priyanka Jayawardena, highlights how the country’s Traffic Light Labelling (TLL) system and sugar-based excise taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) have prompted beverage makers to reformulate their products. Under the TLL, drinks are color-coded based on sugar content: red for high, amber for medium, and green for low. Combined with taxes tied to sugar levels, these incentives have led to a “rapid rise” in NSS usage, with around 70 per cent of green-labelled SSBs and 50 per cent of amber-labelled ones now containing artificial sweeteners like aspartame or sucralose.

This shift comes amid a broader health crisis in Sri Lanka, where NCDs such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases account for nearly 75 per cent of all deaths. Unhealthy diets rich in sugar, salt, and fats are major contributors, prompting the government to act. However, IPS argues that the current framework fails to address NSS, allowing products to appear healthier than they might be. “Reformulation using artificial sweeteners should not replace genuine efforts to lower free sugar consumption,” Jayawardena noted in her analysis.

The Hidden Risks of Non-Sugar Sweeteners

While NSS help beverages meet sugar thresholds and avoid higher taxes, emerging evidence suggests they may not be the harmless alternative they seem. Drawing on a systematic review by the World Health Organization (WHO), IPS points to links between long-term NSS consumption and increased risks of diabetes, heart disease, obesity, and even higher mortality rates among adults. The WHO explicitly advises against using NSS for weight control or NCD prevention, except in cases of pre-existing diabetes where sugar alternatives are necessary.

In Sri Lanka, the prevalence of these substitutes in supposedly “low-sugar” drinks could exacerbate the problem. Consumers, seeing green or amber labels, might perceive these products as healthy choices, leading to overconsumption. “These gaps highlight the need to update and strengthen SSB control policies to address all forms of sweeteners comprehensively,” the IPS report states. Without regulation, manufacturers have a clear incentive to pivot to NSS, evading taxes while maintaining product appeal through sweetness, the report suggests.

The issue is particularly acute in a country grappling with economic challenges, where affordable beverages form a staple in many diets. Data from the IPS assessment underscores the scale: a majority of reformulated drinks now rely on NSS to achieve favourable labels, potentially undermining the original intent of the policies. Health advocates argue this creates a false sense of security, especially among vulnerable groups like children and low-income families who may not fully understand the implications.

Policy Loopholes and Misleading Labels

Sri Lanka’s existing regulations focus solely on added sugar, leaving NSS unregulated. The traffic light label criteria ignores artificial sweeteners, meaning a drink loaded with NSS can still earn a green label if its sugar content is low. Similarly, the excise tax on SSBs is sugar-based, excluding NSS entirely. This “tax loophole,” as described by IPS, encourages a switch that doesn’t necessarily improve nutritional outcomes.

Jayawardena’s blog post on the IPS website emphasizes that this oversight allows misleading marketing. Products touting “low sugar” claims often hide their reliance on artificial alternatives, which could have unintended health effects. “Under the existing Front-of-Pack Labelling (FOPL) system for SSBs, TLL criteria is based only on sugar content,” she writes, noting that this can “mislead consumers into viewing them as healthier choices.”

The problem isn’t unique to Sri Lanka, but the country’s rapid adoption of sugar-focused measures without NSS safeguards has amplified it. As manufacturers adapt, the market for artificially sweetened beverages has boomed, with little oversight on their long-term impact. Critics, including public health experts, call this a “policy blind spot” that could hinder progress against NCDs.

Learning from Global Best Practices

International examples offer a roadmap for Sri Lanka to plug these gaps. The Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) Nutrient Profile model, for instance, treats any amount of NSS as part of an unhealthy food profile, guiding more comprehensive regulations. Countries like Mexico have adopted mandatory FOPL systems with warning labels for NSS, using black octagons to flag products high in calories, sugars, fats, or containing artificial sweeteners and caffeine. This design helps consumers make informed choices quickly.

Other nations have gone further by including NSS in taxation. In the Philippines, a volume-based excise tax applies to SSBs with either sugar or artificial sweeteners, discouraging excessive intake of both. Similar approaches in Chile, France, India, and Portugal have expanded taxes beyond sugar, promoting genuine reformulation toward healthier options.

These models demonstrate that holistic policies – covering both sugar and NSS – yield better results. “International evidence shows that comprehensive measures are more effective than sugar-only measures,” the IPS report concludes.

Charting a Path Forward for Healthier Policies

To counter the NSS boom, IPS recommends a multi-pronged strategy. First, update fiscal policies to include NSS in SSB taxes and introduce FOPL warning labels specifically for artificial sweeteners. This would incentivize manufacturers to reduce all sweeteners, not just sugar.

Second, boost public awareness through campaigns highlighting the risks of NSS and promoting unsweetened alternatives. Behaviour-change communication could guide consumers toward healthier diets, emphasising practical tips for daily life.

Third, enforce stricter rules in schools, banning the sale, marketing, and advertising of NSS-containing products in canteens and events. This protects children, who are particularly susceptible to marketing tactics.

Finally, adopt a broader nutrient profile model like PAHO’s to prevent reformulation loopholes. By closing these gaps, Sri Lanka can advance its nutrition agenda, reduce NCD burdens, and ensure policies truly promote public health.

As the government reviews its strategies, stakeholders urge swift action. With NCDs claiming thousands of lives annually, the artificial sweetener surge serves as a wake-up call: effective regulation must evolve with industry tactics. Failure to adapt could undermine years of progress, leaving consumers exposed to hidden risks in their quest for sweeter, but not necessarily healthier, options.