E954 / Glazing agents, gases & sweeteners
Saccharin and salts
Safety in brief
Safe
Recorded EatMatrix rating, not a new clinical review. The amount, your sensitivities and country rules still matter.
- Watch for
- No allergen or sensitivity is recorded for this ingredient here. Check the whole product label; this is not an allergen-free guarantee.
- Our advice
- Short human trials give differing glucose-response results. Dose, comparison and study length matter. Neither result establishes your long-term diabetes risk from one food containing saccharin.
What it is
Saccharin is one of the oldest artificial sweeteners, roughly 300-400 times sweeter than sugar, and is used in diet sodas, tabletop sweeteners, and sugar-free products. It has no calories and does not raise blood sugar. Early rodent studies in the 1970s linked saccharin to bladder tumors, leading to a warning label era in the US, but later research showed this mechanism doesn't apply to humans, and the warning was repealed; major regulators now consider it safe within set daily limits.
Also appears on labels as: Saccharin, Saccharin and salts, Sodium saccharin, Calcium saccharin, Potassium saccharin, Saccharin sodium, Saccharin potassium, Saccharin calcium, E954, E 954, E-954, INS 954.
Dietary information
- Vegan
- Yes
- Halal
- Yes
- Gluten-free
- Yes
- Allergens
- None recorded
Recorded ingredient information. Check the product label or certification: sources, other ingredients and cross-contact can vary.
Research & body effects
What human studies mean for E954
Blood sugar and gut bacteria: a short experiment
A 2022 randomized study assigned 120 healthy adults to two weeks of saccharin, sucralose, aspartame or stevia sachets, a glucose-vehicle control, or no supplement. Saccharin and sucralose impaired measured glucose responses compared with controls; this finding was not uniform across all four sweeteners.
This ingredient was among the two with that glucose-response finding. The study did not measure new diabetes diagnoses or establish what years of ordinary food exposure would do.
Changes in gut bacteria are not automatically gut damage. Transferring participants’ microbes into mice supported a possible mechanism; it was not a second human trial or a validated test of your personal sensitivity.
Four sweeteners, gut microbes and glucose responses. Indexed abstract and selected publisher text read; complete methods and supplements pending. Indexed comments were identified, not fully appraised. Some authors disclose microbiome-company interests.
A July 2026 trial: compare the treatments, not just the starting value
Thirty-nine healthy adults completed three 14-day periods: 66 g/day sucrose, 220 mg/day saccharin, or 220 mg/day steviol glycosides containing more than 97% rebaudioside A. The study found no significant between-treatment differences in glucose or insulin regulation. Sucrose produced higher triglycerides than saccharin.
Some measurements changed from the initial baseline. There was no unsweetened control period, and that baseline was not a randomized treatment. Those changes alone cannot show that a sweetener caused harm compared with having none. Short follow-up and healthy volunteers limit the conclusion.
Different doses, controls and participants may help explain why short saccharin studies disagree. This result does not erase the earlier glucose-response finding.
Saccharin, rebaudioside A and sucrose: 14-day crossover trial. Selected main-text methods, results, limitations and funding read; supplements not fully appraised. Funded through the VINNOVA Antidiabetic Food Centre.
Related whole-diet evidence: a benefit and a trade-off
The 2025 SWEET trial compared low-sugar diets that allowed or excluded products with many sweeteners after an initial weight-loss phase. The analysis of 277 adults who reached the initial loss target favoured allowing these products by about 1.6 kg at one year. The difference was not statistically significant when only completers were analysed.
About 40% of recruited adults did not complete the study. The sweetener group reported more abdominal pain, loose stools and gas. Many products and ingredients varied together: neither the weight result nor the symptoms can be attributed to this one additive.
Related whole-diet SWEET trial: weight maintenance and gut symptoms. Selected main-text methods, results, limitations and declarations read; supplements not fully appraised. EU Horizon 2020 funding; several authors disclose food-industry relationships.
EatMatrix’s reading
Short human trials give differing glucose-response results. Dose, comparison and study length matter. Neither result establishes your long-term diabetes risk from one food containing saccharin.
A practical choice
Compare the whole food and your usual alternative, including free sugars, fibre and how often you eat it. Water or an unsweetened drink is a straightforward option. A sweetener name alone cannot tell you the dose in a serving or predict your personal response.
WHO’s 2023 recommendation against using non-sugar sweeteners for long-term weight control is conditional and excludes people with pre-existing diabetes. It is nutrition guidance, not a country ban or a replacement for an additive safety assessment. Read WHO’s scope and limits.
Selected sources checked . The reading scope is stated beside each source. These are selected findings, not an exhaustive clinical review or a personal diet prescription. Indexed notices were checked where accessible; missing notices do not prove that no correction or later version exists. The research does not by itself change recorded ratings or country permissions. Use the country section for the separate legal question.
Selected research on E954
How to read study types- Randomized trialSaccharin, rebaudioside A and sucrose: 14-day crossover trial
Thirty-nine adults completed three 14-day periods. No significant between-treatment glucose/insulin differences were found. Baseline changes are not a randomized comparison with no sweetener. The stevia preparation was mainly rebaudioside A.
- Randomized trialRelated whole-diet SWEET trial: weight maintenance and gut symptoms
Related whole-diet trial favoured sweetener-containing products for weight maintenance in one analysis, but not the completer analysis. Dropout was high and gut symptoms were more frequent. Many ingredients varied together; no individual-additive effect was isolated.
- Regulator reviewEFSA re-evaluation of saccharin
Raised the safe daily limit to 9 mg per kg of body weight. High-end intake estimates stay below it.
- Randomized trialFour sweeteners, gut microbes and glucose responses
Two-week trial in 120 healthy adults: saccharin and sucralose impaired measured glucose responses; this was not uniform across all four sweeteners. Microbiome changes and mouse transfers do not establish future diabetes or a personal sensitivity test.
Earlier source summaries checked ; latest additions checked . See the detailed research section for what was read and the remaining limits. This is a selection of sources, not a complete literature review. Authority assessments apply to the uses and places they cover.
Health notes from our ingredient record
- Can leave a bitter or metallic aftertaste in some people.
- Historical bladder-cancer concern in rodent studies has not been confirmed in humans and is now considered not relevant to human risk.
- As with other intense sweeteners, some studies suggest possible effects on gut bacteria with heavy long-term use, though evidence is limited.
Other references from our ingredient record
These links come from the original ingredient record. They are separate from the source reviews above and have not all been checked for the exact ingredient, amount consumed or claim. Dates are shown newest first.
- Re‐evaluation of saccharin and its sodium, potassium and calcium salts (E 954) as food additives — EFSA Panel on Food Additives, EFSA Journal (2024). Official EFSA scientific opinion (bibliographic reference, imported 2026-10-13). It covers the additive as a group assessment and is not an individual human study; read the opinion for its findings.
Country rules
Country checks for E954
Permission depends on the market, type of food, amount and conditions. A scientific opinion or an E-number alone does not establish a legal use. These checks are separate from the stored EatMatrix rating.
Compare all eight markets and their sources
| Market | What is checked |
|---|---|
| European Union | Regulation (EC) 1333/2008, Annex II Part B, version , contains the exact code E954: Saccharins. Listing alone does not allow every food use. Part E food categories, limits, specifications and applicable later acts still need a product-specific check. Source read: . |
| Great Britain | The FSA register record for E954 (Saccharins) lists “Authorised” in England, Scotland and Wales. Register updated: 01 April 2025; record checked: . Food-specific conditions and specifications still need a separate legal check. |
| United States | Complete current-use review pending. Any scoped provision in the label guide above applies only to the stated use. FDA explains the applicable food-additive and GRAS framework. |
| Northern Ireland | Review pending. Check the applicable EU rules and territory arrangements; the GB register alone does not establish this status. FSA guidance is a starting source, not a verified permission for this entry. |
| Canada | Named food-use records located. Health Canada lists the preparations below for specified foods and purposes. This is conditional permission for those uses, not approval of every product or a personal safety verdict. Only the named records and conditions below were located. Exact composition and specifications still need matching. Source tables captured . List publication dates are shown separately. Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) is a condition of use, not an unlimited amount or a recommended intake. Food and Drug Regulations B.16.003 requires the listed source, purpose, amount and other conditions to match. The official consolidation read was current to 21 September 2026; product specifications and applicable later changes still need checking. Read 40 listed food-use conditionsCalcium SaccharinHealth Canada: List of Permitted Sweeteners. List published ; item C.1.
Potassium SaccharinHealth Canada: List of Permitted Sweeteners. List published ; item P.1.
SaccharinHealth Canada: List of Permitted Sweeteners. List published ; item S.1.
Sodium SaccharinHealth Canada: List of Permitted Sweeteners. List published ; item S.2.
EatMatrix reading: match the exact preparation and food first. A manufacturing limit is not an acceptable daily intake (ADI). A label without the amount cannot establish exposure, and an unlisted name here does not establish a ban. |
| Australia | Review pending. Food Standards Code permissions and conditions need an additive-specific check. FSANZ food-additive rules is a starting source, not a verified permission for this entry. |
| New Zealand | Review pending. Food Standards Code permissions and conditions need an additive-specific check. FSANZ food-additive rules is a starting source, not a verified permission for this entry. |
| Japan | Review pending. The relevant list, identity and use standards need an additive-specific check. CAA food-additive lists is a starting source, not a verified permission for this entry. |
Sources & review status
Check what each source covers: an authority’s conclusion, a research finding and a country’s legal permission answer different questions.
What this guide covers
- Selected research
- 4 source summaries, with publication dates and study types. Several publications may describe the same study population.
- Official assessment reference
- EFSA opinion located for E954. Identity and code coverage checked; full findings review pending.
- Original ingredient record
- 1 research link; newest recorded date: . Sources added separately to this guide are not included in this count.
This guide brings together our ingredient record and the dated sources shown here. Missing information describes a gap in this guide; it does not mean an ingredient is untested, safe or harmful. This is not a complete review of every study, preparation or current country rule. The amount in a product and how it is used still matter.
How to read the ratings, research and country checksAgency labels recorded by EatMatrix
These are imported database classifications, not verified current statements from each authority. Use the dated official sources below for their actual scope and conclusions.
| Authority | Database label |
|---|---|
| FDA | Safe |
| WHO | Safe |
| EFSA | Safe |
| FSANZ | Safe |
| Japan | Safe |
| UK FSA | Safe |
An official EFSA assessment for E954
An official scientific opinion covering E954 exists. A missing research link or rating in our database does not mean this additive has never been assessed. This reference identifies the document; it does not replace a review of its findings, later research or current food-use rules.
EFSA: Re-evaluation of saccharin and its sodium, potassium and calcium salts (E954)
- Published
- Codes covered by this reference
- E954
- Source type
- EFSA scientific opinion, not an individual human trial
EatMatrix checked this reference’s identity and code coverage on . The full evidence review, an exhaustive check for subsequent publications and corrections, and market-specific permissions remain pending. This does not change the recorded EatMatrix rating above.
Database updated: . What does an E number mean on a food label?
Common questions
Frequently asked questions
What is EatMatrix's recorded rating for E954?
The recorded EatMatrix rating for E954 (Saccharin and salts) is “Safe”. It is calculated from labels stored in our ingredient database. These labels are not verified current regulator decisions or country permissions. A database update date is not a scientific review date.
Is E954 vegan, halal or gluten-free?
According to our ingredient data for Saccharin and salts — vegan: yes, vegetarian: yes, halal: yes, kosher: yes, gluten-free: yes, dairy-free: yes. Manufacturing sources can vary between products; check the label if it matters to you.
What is E954 and why is it used?
Saccharin is one of the oldest artificial sweeteners, roughly 300-400 times sweeter than sugar, and is used in diet sodas, tabletop sweeteners, and sugar-free products. It has no calories and does not raise blood sugar. Early rodent studies in the 1970s linked saccharin to bladder tumors, leading to a warning label era in the US, but later research showed this mechanism doesn't apply to humans, and the warning was repealed; major regulators now consider it safe within set daily limits.
Does E954 contain allergens?
No known allergens are recorded for Saccharin and salts.
Read the whole label.
Scan a food label with EatMatrix on iPhone to look up its ingredients in the app.
Ingredient research, by email
Join the list for food additive research updates. Unsubscribe any time.
This page shows information and classifications recorded in our ingredient database. Current scientific and market-specific verification remains pending as described above. It is general information, not medical advice.