Talk:Sucralose
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sucralose article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Aggressive archiving of discussions on genotoxicity
[edit]Be advised: It seems as if there are individuals (some utilizing bots) extremely opposed to both the addition of genotoxicity to the article, as well as the discussion of genotoxicity here on the talk page. Any additions to the article discussing genotoxicity are immediately reverted, and discussions on the talk page are quickly archived. 2600:1008:B21C:8E1D:78BD:46FF:FEEA:87D6 (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
- Discussions are archived only if they have been inactive for 90 days. Any medical-related statement added to the article absolutely must be cited to a WP:MEDRS compliant source. Otherwise such statements will be reverted. It's that simple. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Proposed sources
[edit]- This information needs to be on the page. period.
- "The consumption of sucralose, a commonly used artificial sweetener, is associated with various adverse health effects. Despite being considered safe following previous studies, recent research suggests possible links to systemic inflammation, metabolic diseases, disruptions in gut microbiota, liver damage, and toxic effects at the cellular level"
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10971371/
- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37246822/
- https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10971371/#B7-life-14-00323
- Lots of studies regarding the toxicity of sucralose at the cellular level are popping up now. 2601:243:E07F:5F80:9C68:7ACB:B62D:7503 (talk) 20:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
2601:243:*, in wikipedia "Biomedical information must be based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources, and must accurately reflect current knowledge." Per WP:MEDRS, a wikipedia content guideline, acceptable sources include "review articles (especially systematic reviews) published in reputable medical journals, academic and professional books written by experts in the relevant fields and from respected publishers, and guidelines or position statements from national or international expert bodies. Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content, as such sources often include unreliable or preliminary information; for example, early lab results that do not hold in later clinical trials."
Your proposed sources should be avoided because https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37246822/ is a primary source and the the other 2 sources are from MDPI, a publisher with questionable reputation. JimRenge (talk) 21:02, 21 December 2024 (UTC)