View

The Study

Artificial sweeteners and risk of cardiovascular diseases: results from the prospective NutriNet-Santé cohort

In simple terms

This study watched a bunch of people over many years and noticed that those who ate more artificial sweeteners also had more heart problems. But it didn’t make people change what they ate — so we can’t say the sweeteners caused the problems, just that they tended to happen together.

66%

Analysis score

66/ 72

Maximum 72 for a cohort study.

Where the score came from

Reporting40
Methodology38
Publication100
Statistical100
Study type (basis of the score)
Cohort Study
Level 2b - Individual cohort study
What’s the bottom line?

This study looked at whether people who drink diet drinks or eat foods with artificial sweeteners are more likely to have heart problems than those who don't.

Where does this study sit?

Reviews of RCTs (Meta-analyses)

Max 100

Randomized Trials

Max 90

Reviews of Cohort Studies

Max 85

Cohort Studies

Max 72

Reviews of Case-Control Studies

Max 63

Case-Control Studies

Max 58

Cross-Sectional & Case Series

Max 50

Expert Opinion

Max 5
StrongerWeaker
Cohort Studies
Level 2b
66

66 / 100

Quality score

Groups of people are followed over time to see who develops an outcome. Strong for identifying risk factors and associations, but cannot prove causation as firmly as RCTs.

Cannot establish causation

Save studies & get personalized insights

Create a free account to save this study, track new evidence as it comes in, and get breakdowns of studies in the topics you care about.

Key takeaways

Summary

Based on the study abstract and findings.

  1. 1Even though the increase in risk is small for each person, because so many people consume these sweeteners daily, it could affect a lot of people's health over time.
  2. 2People who ate more artificial sweeteners had a 9% higher chance of heart disease, 17% higher chance of stroke, and those who ate acesulfame potassium or sucralose had 40% and 31% higher chances of heart artery problems.

Score breakdown, methodology, conflicts of interest, evidence analysis & raw study data

Publication

Journal

The BMJ

Year

2022

Authors

C. Debras, E. Chazelas, L. Sellem, R. Porcher, N. Druesne-Pecollo, Y. Esseddik, Fabien Szabo de Edelenyi, C. Agaësse, A. De Sa, Rebecca Lutchia, L. Fezeu, C. Julia, E. Kesse‐Guyot, B. Allès, P. Galan, S. Hercberg, M. Deschasaux-Tanguy, I. Huybrechts, B. Srour, M. Touvier

Open Access
195 citations
Analysis v5

Related Content

Fit Body Science verdict — we translate health studies into clear verdicts backed by peer-reviewed research.

Not medical advice. For informational purposes only. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional before making health decisions.