Some small decisions can leave traces much further than you thought. A group of scientists in Chili conducted a study with mice on sucralose and steviatwo sweeteners very used.

They discovered that parents who consumed these products left changes in microbiota and certain genes in their children and grandchildren.

The effects were neither serious nor direct on human health.but the finding raises questions about how these compounds can influence early stages of life.

“Our findings demonstrate that parental consumption of sucralose or stevia induces persistent, intergenerational changes in metabolism, intestinal and hepatic gene expression, gut microbiota composition, and production of microbial metabolites in unexposed offspring,” the researchers stated.

The results were published in the journal Frontiers in Nutrition. The work was led by Francisca Concha Celume, together with a team from the University of Chile and the Institute of Nutrition and Food Technology in Santiago.

They focused on sucralose and stevia, which are used to sweeten foods and drinks. The sucralose It is an artificial sweetener, created in a laboratory from sugar and without calories. Instead, the stevia comes from a plant, Stevia rebaudianaand it also sweetens without adding calories, but it is natural.

How what you eat can leave a mark

Drinking drinks or products with sucralose and stevia is already part of daily life, especially among young people and those who plan to become mothers.

The researchers started with a simple question: can this habit influence the intestinal health and metabolism of children?

The researchers looked to see if consuming these compounds changed the diversity of bacteria in the gut and gene expression.

They analyzed genes such as Tlr4 and Tnf and key bacteria in the mice. They thought that parents’ habits can leave invisible traces on children and grandchildren.

To do this, they measured the bacterial variety and the amount of fatty acids that protect the intestine. They used C57BL/6J mice.

One group drank water, another water with sucralose, and another water with stevia for 16 weeks. The doses were similar to those consumed by a person.

Results and changes in the family

They then raised the mice and studied their children and grandchildren. The latter only drank water. They saw no changes in glucose tolerance in the parents.

The effects appeared in the children and sometimes in the grandchildren of those who received sucralose, especially in the males.

Stevia had less impact and only in the first generation. The gut bacteria in the sweetener groups were more varied, but produced fewer short-chain fatty acids.

“The reduction in SCFA persisted in the F1 and F2 generations, with additional decreases in propionate and butyrate, and no significant differences between the two sweetener groups,” the researchers wrote.

Sucralose increased the expression of Tlr4 and Tnf in the intestine of parents and children. Stevia caused this effect only in the first litter.

With sucralose, potentially harmful bacteria increased and beneficial bacteria decreased. Stevia changed the bacterial composition less and the effect was short-lived.

Moderation and doubts towards the future

The scientists clarified that the results only apply to mice. They cannot be transferred directly to humans.

It was also not possible to separate the effect of pregnancy from the period after birth. They only analyzed the fecal microbiota.

The recommendation today is to use these sweeteners in moderation. They suggested that more research should be done.

“When we compared generations, these effects were generally stronger in the first generation and tended to decrease in the second generation,” Concha said. “Overall, the effects linked to sucralose were more consistent and persistent across generations.”

The team emphasized that although this research identifies associations between different changes in health status, it does not establish causality.

“The objective of this investigation is not to create alarm, but to highlight the need to continue investigating,” Concha said. “It might be reasonable to consider moderation in the consumption of these additives and continue studying their long-term biological effects,” he added.

“These results challenge the assumption that non-nutritive sweeteners are metabolically inert and underscore their potential to influence offspring health through microbial and molecular pathways,” they highlighted.