ReviewNutrients2025
Sucralose: A Review of Environmental, Oxidative and Genomic Stress.
Review in Nutrients, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Network Toxicology Framework for Identification of Immune System Disruption by Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substance (PFAS) Mixture: In Silico Analysis.Journal of xenobiotics · 2026Article
- Mutual Influence of Sucralose and Bisphenol A on Biological and Neurobehavioral Action inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Article
- Effect of High Intensity Sweeteners on the Reproductive System: From the Onset of Puberty to Menstrual Health: A Comprehensive Review of Human and Animal Evidence.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Artificial and natural non-nutritive sweeteners drive divergent gut and genetic responses across generations.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Sweeteners in E-Cigarettes: A Minireview of Flavoring and Biological Action.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- Determination of Artificial Sweeteners in Commercial Beverages: Do We Know What We Are Consuming?Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This review explores current knowledge on the environmental, oxidative, and genomic effects of sucralose (E955), an artificial sweetener widely used in food products, including those for children, and known to cross both the placental barrier and into breast milk. Although initially considered safe, research conducted over the past two decades has presented conflicting evidence regarding its long-term impact, particularly on ecosystems and biological systems. Structurally similar to chlorinated compounds such as perfluoralkyl substances (PFAS), sucralose is highly persistent in the environment, which complicates its degradation and removal, especially from aquatic systems. Several studies have reported behavioral, metabolic, and even genomic alterations in aquatic organisms exposed to sucralose, raising concerns about its broader ecological safety. In addition, its presence has been linked to shifts in microbiota composition in both environmental and human contexts. Reports of sucralose-induced oxidative stress further highlight the need for caution in its continued use, particularly in sensitive formulations. Given its widespread presence and resistance to degradation, further investigation into the environmental and biological safety of sucralose is urgently needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.