Sugar and Brain Fog: What Might Explain the Feeling
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 29, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Feeling mentally slow, unfocused, sleepy, fuzzy, or forgetful after eating something sweet is a real subjective experience. The difficult part is identifying what that experience means. Current human evidence does not support one universal mechanism in which dietary sugar reliably causes a distinct condition called “brain fog.” Brain fog itself is a broad, informal symptom label, and studies of sugar show different effects depending on the sugar tested, the meal context, the person, the timing of measurement, and whether researchers measure fatigue, mood, attention, memory, or another cognitive outcome.
The most evidence-based answer is therefore conditional: sugar or a carbohydrate-rich eating episode can coincide with sensations that people describe as brain fog, and controlled research has found greater fatigue or lower alertness after carbohydrate intake in some early post-meal comparisons. At the same time, controlled studies do not show a consistent, general cognitive collapse after sugar. Some glucose experiments even find narrow short-term improvements in immediate memory or sustained attention under specific conditions. The popular story of “sugar goes up, then the brain crashes” is much simpler than the evidence.
This article explains what “sugar brain fog” can mean, what human research actually shows, which mechanisms are plausible, where the evidence is weak, and how to interpret a recurring pattern without turning a nonspecific symptom into a diagnosis.
Quick answer: can sugar cause brain fog?
Sugar can be temporally associated with feeling foggy, tired, or less alert, but the evidence does not show that sugar reliably causes a single syndrome called brain fog. A 2025 clinical review of brain fog emphasizes that people use the term for many different subjective experiences. A broader 2025 cross-condition review likewise describes brain fog as an overlapping mix of cognitive symptoms, fatigue, and affect rather than one uniform biological entity.
For dietary sugar specifically, the best controlled evidence is mixed. A systematic review and meta-analysis of glucose and sucrose trials found limited evidence for improved immediate verbal memory and inconsistent findings across other cognitive domains. A later systematic review and meta-analysis of free and added sugars and cognition reached a similar conclusion: experimental studies are dominated by acute glucose administration, while longer-term observational studies ask a different question about habitual diet.
A separate meta-analysis of acute carbohydrate effects on mood found no reliable “sugar rush” benefit, but did find greater fatigue and lower alertness within the first hour in some comparisons. That finding offers one plausible route from eating carbohydrates to a subjective sense of fogginess, while still falling short of proving a universal sugar-induced cognitive crash.
What does “brain fog” actually mean?
Brain fog is not a formal diagnosis. It is a popular and increasingly clinical phrase for subjective mental difficulty. Depending on the person, it may mean trouble concentrating, slower thinking, forgetfulness, difficulty finding words, unusual mental effort, reduced clarity, fatigue, or a sense of being detached from normal cognitive sharpness.
That heterogeneity matters because “brain fog after sugar” can describe very different outcomes. Someone who feels sleepy after dessert, someone who struggles to sustain attention after lunch, and someone who notices word-finding difficulty are not necessarily experiencing the same phenomenon. In a large cross-sectional study of 25,796 participants, self-reported brain fog was most strongly characterized by difficulties focusing and following conversations, while objective cognitive scores were only modestly lower on average. Subjective cognitive difficulty and measurable cognitive performance overlap, but they are not identical.
This is why the wording “sugar brain fog” should be treated as a description of timing and experience, not as proof of mechanism. The phrase tells us what a person noticed. It does not, by itself, tell us why it happened.
What human studies show about sugar and cognition
Acute glucose and sucrose experiments
Experimental studies often give participants a measured glucose drink and compare later task performance with a placebo or control condition. That is useful for testing a specific acute effect, but it is not the same as studying ordinary meals, desserts, fruit, soda, or a person’s habitual diet.
The 2021 systematic review by Reche García and colleagues included 37 intervention trials. Thirty-five tested glucose and only three investigated sucrose, which is an important limitation when people casually translate the entire literature into claims about “sugar.” The clearest pooled signal was a benefit for immediate word recall in some analyses. Results for attention, executive function, processing speed, and other outcomes were inconsistent.
That pattern is almost the opposite of a simple claim that sugar universally fogs the brain. It shows that acute effects are task-specific and context-specific. A person can feel subjectively tired while showing little objective change on one task, or can perform differently on one cognitive domain without a general shift in mental ability.
Glycemic load and post-meal cognition
Another research approach compares meals that differ in glycemic index or glycemic load. A 2022 meta-analysis of glycemic load and cognitive performance found no overall cognitive advantage during the first 119 minutes after breakfast and only a small later benefit of lower glycemic load for immediate episodic memory. An earlier systematic review of glycemic index and cognition also concluded that findings were inconsistent.
These studies do not justify a rule such as “high-glycemic food always causes brain fog.” They suggest that meal composition and timing can matter for some outcomes, but effects are not uniform across people, tasks, or time points.
Fatigue and alertness may matter more than a dramatic cognitive crash
The strongest acute finding that resembles what many people call brain fog comes from mood and arousal research rather than from a universal deficit in objective cognition. The 2019 carbohydrate-and-mood meta-analysis analyzed 176 effect sizes from 31 studies and found no positive effect of carbohydrates on mood. Within the first hour, carbohydrate intake was associated with greater fatigue and lower alertness compared with placebo in some analyses.
A systematic review of glucose and sucrose effects on mood similarly found limited effects of glucose and no positive mood effect of sucrose. Feeling less alert can easily be described in everyday language as “foggy,” even if formal memory or attention testing does not show a parallel decline.
Long-term dietary patterns are a different question
Long-term observational research asks whether people who habitually consume more added sugar or sugar-sweetened beverages differ in later cognitive outcomes. The 2024 review of free and added sugars and cognition found that cohort and cross-sectional studies often reported associations between higher added-sugar intake and cognitive impairment. A 2022 meta-analysis of sugar-sweetened beverages and cognitive disorders also reported a positive association, although heterogeneity between studies was high.
Those findings matter for long-term research, but they do not explain why one person feels foggy forty minutes after a cookie. Observational associations can reflect many interacting factors, including total dietary pattern, health status, activity, sleep, socioeconomic conditions, and other behaviors. Long-term association and immediate post-meal mechanism are separate evidence questions.
Why might someone feel foggy after eating sugar?
There is no single answer. Several pathways can produce the experience, and more than one can operate at the same time. The evidence is strongest when these are framed as candidate explanations rather than a universal chain.
1. A change in fatigue or alertness
For many people, “brain fog” is partly an arousal complaint: they feel sleepy, heavy, less mentally sharp, or less motivated to sustain effort. Controlled carbohydrate research provides some support for increased fatigue and reduced alertness during the first hour after intake. This does not establish that sugar uniquely causes brain fog, because many studies examine carbohydrates broadly and because subjective alertness is not the same outcome as objective cognition.
If the main experience is “I feel less awake,” the most relevant neighboring English Hub article is Sugar and Energy: Why Sweet Foods Can Feel Energizing. If the experience is framed as a sudden post-sugar downturn, Sugar Crash: What It Means and Why Energy Can Feel Different owns that specific intent.
2. Task-specific cognitive effects
Sugar research does not produce one global result for “the brain.” Immediate recall, sustained attention, working memory, reaction time, executive control, and subjective clarity are different outcomes. A small experimental effect in one domain should not be generalized into “sugar improves cognition” or “sugar impairs cognition.”
For the broader evidence on objective performance, see Sugar and Cognition: Attention, Memory, and Mental Performance. For the narrower question of concentrating, see Sugar and Focus: Attention, Energy, and Expectation. Keeping those outcomes separate prevents brain fog from becoming a catch-all explanation.
3. Meal composition and timing
A sweet food is rarely consumed in a laboratory vacuum. Desserts contain mixtures of carbohydrate, fat, protein, water, and other ingredients. Sweet drinks differ from solid foods. A large mixed meal differs from isolated glucose. The timing of the meal, the amount eaten, whether someone had been fasting, and the interval before they judge their mental state can all change what is being observed.
Glycemic-load research suggests that cognition after meals can vary with timing, but the pooled evidence does not show a simple early high-versus-low glycemic split. That makes “I ate sugar, therefore the sugar caused the fog” a hypothesis to examine rather than a conclusion.
4. Hunger relief and the starting state
Many acute glucose experiments are conducted after a period of fasting. A person who begins a test hungry or low in subjective energy is in a different state from someone who eats dessert after a full meal. Some apparent benefits in acute glucose studies may therefore be easier to observe under particular baseline conditions, while the same dose in another context may feel irrelevant or unpleasant.
This context dependence helps explain why personal anecdotes can point in opposite directions. One person says sugar makes thinking easier; another says it makes them foggy. Both experiences can be sincere without establishing a universal physiological rule.
5. Expectation and symptom interpretation
Expectations can shape how bodily and cognitive sensations are noticed and labeled. In one balanced experiment on sugar intake and expectation, expecting sugar increased tension regardless of whether sugar had actually been consumed, while most cognitive and mood outcomes were unaffected by expectation. An earlier placebo-expectancy study of glucose and cognition found expectancy-dependent effects on one vigilance outcome.
These studies do not show that brain fog is “just psychological.” They show something more useful: expectation, actual intake, and performance can contribute separately. If someone already believes that sweets cause an inevitable crash, ordinary post-meal sleepiness or a difficult work period may be interpreted through that expectation. The experience remains real; the causal attribution can still be uncertain.
6. Interoception: how internal sensations become a cognitive explanation
Interoception is the perception and interpretation of signals from inside the body. After eating, people can notice fullness, warmth, heaviness, thirst, alertness, tension, sleepiness, or changes in motivation. Brain fog is often the label given to the combined experience rather than to one directly measurable process.
Modern brain-fog research supports this broader reading. The 2025 Trends in Neurosciences review argues that brain fog across conditions blends cognition with fatigue and affect, and that common language may unite experiences with heterogeneous mechanisms. That is directly relevant to post-food complaints: the label can be stable even when the underlying contributors differ.
7. Another factor may be present at the same time
Persistent brain fog has many potential medical, neurological, psychological, sleep-related, medication-related, and contextual contributors. A sweet meal can coincide with one of them without being the primary cause. The temporal sequence “I ate this, then I felt foggy” is useful information, but it is not a diagnostic test.
This point becomes especially important when fogginess is recurrent, worsening, present even without sweet foods, or accompanied by other significant symptoms. In those cases, the useful question is broader than sugar.
Is brain fog the same thing as a sugar crash?
No. “Brain fog” describes a subjective cognitive experience. “Sugar crash” is a popular phrase used for a perceived drop in energy, alertness, or mood after eating sugar or carbohydrates. The two can overlap, but neither term identifies a single mechanism on its own.
The acute carbohydrate meta-analysis found evidence of increased fatigue and reduced alertness in some early comparisons, which can resemble the everyday idea of a crash. It did not establish a universal sequence in which everyone becomes cognitively impaired after sugar. For the dedicated evidence review, see Sugar Rush: Is It Real? Energy, Expectation, and the Evidence and Sugar Crash: What It Means and Why Energy Can Feel Different.
What about the “blood sugar spike, then crash” explanation?
It is common online to explain every episode of post-sugar fog as a rapid rise and fall in blood glucose. That explanation is too broad for the evidence. Dietary sugar intake and measured blood glucose are related physiological topics, but a subjective feeling cannot establish a particular glucose pattern, and the controlled cognition literature does not show a universal post-sugar cognitive crash.
This article therefore does not infer hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, insulin resistance, or diabetes from brain fog. Blood glucose readings, glucose targets, A1C, continuous glucose monitoring, hypoglycemia treatment, and personalized diabetes management belong to medical evaluation and to a different clinical information domain.
The useful distinction is simple: “I feel foggy after sweets” is a symptom pattern. “My blood glucose is clinically abnormal” is a measured medical finding. One should not be substituted for the other.
The brain uses glucose, but that does not mean it needs added sugar
The brain has high energy demands and normally relies heavily on glucose. A major review of glucose in brain physiology describes glucose as a central energy substrate for normal brain function. That physiological fact is often converted into a misleading slogan: “the brain needs sugar, so eating sugar is necessary for mental clarity.”
The body can make glucose available from many carbohydrate-containing foods and through normal metabolic regulation. Table sugar and added sugar are not required as special cognitive supplements. The broader distinction is explained in Sugar and the Brain: Glucose, Energy, Reward, and Common Myths.
What “sugar” means in this question
The word sugar can refer to different exposures. Sucrose is ordinary table sugar. Glucose and fructose are monosaccharides. A laboratory glucose drink is not the same exposure as sucrose, a sugar-sweetened beverage, whole fruit, sweetened yogurt, or a mixed meal. Research conclusions should stay attached to the exposure actually studied.
On U.S. Nutrition Facts labels, the FDA distinguishes Total Sugars from Added Sugars. Total Sugars include naturally occurring and added sugars. Added Sugars include sugars added during processing, packaged sweeteners, syrups and honey, and sugars from concentrated fruit or vegetable juices; naturally occurring sugars in milk, fruits, and vegetables are excluded from the Added Sugars line.
The World Health Organization uses the broader category free sugars, which includes sugars added by manufacturers, cooks, or consumers and sugars naturally present in honey, syrups, fruit juices, and fruit juice concentrates. FDA Added Sugars and WHO free sugars overlap, but they are not identical categories.
These definitions matter because a study about glucose, another about sugar-sweetened beverages, and another about habitual added-sugar intake are not interchangeable evidence for “sugar brain fog.”
Does sugar impair focus?
Not consistently. Some individual experiments report task-specific changes, while systematic reviews find mixed results across attention measures. In the Giles experiment, actual HFCS intake improved some sustained-attention measures, while most other cognitive outcomes did not change. That single study does not prove a general focus benefit; it illustrates why the evidence cannot be compressed into a universal claim.
The dedicated intent owner is Sugar and Focus: Attention, Energy, and Expectation. Brain fog can include trouble focusing, but focus is only one part of the broader subjective experience.
Does sugar impair memory?
Again, the answer depends on the timescale and study design. Acute glucose trials sometimes report better immediate recall, while longer-term observational research often associates higher added-sugar or sugar-sweetened-beverage intake with poorer cognitive outcomes. Those findings answer different questions.
For the memory-specific human evidence, see Sugar and Memory: What Human Research Shows. A momentary feeling of forgetfulness after a dessert does not establish the same process studied in long-term cognitive-aging research.
Does long-term high sugar intake explain an immediate foggy feeling?
No direct inference is justified. Long-term dietary studies can identify associations across months or years. An immediate episode after a meal occurs on a timescale of minutes or hours. The mechanisms, confounders, and outcomes differ.
This distinction is essential for health information. Long-term research can support general dietary guidance without proving why a particular person felt foggy today. Conversely, a person who does not feel brain fog after sugar has not disproved population-level evidence about excessive free-sugar intake.
Can fruit sugar cause the same “brain fog”?
Whole fruit should not be treated as nutritionally equivalent to table sugar, syrup, or a sugar-sweetened drink simply because it contains naturally occurring sugars. Whole fruit also provides water, fiber, micronutrients, acids, and a different food matrix. The FDA does not count naturally occurring sugars in intact fruits as Added Sugars.
If someone repeatedly notices symptoms after a particular fruit or any specific food, the pattern may be worth discussing in a broader dietary or clinical context. The observation should not be generalized into “fruit sugar causes brain fog” without evidence.
What can you do if you repeatedly feel foggy after sweet foods?
The most useful first step is to make the pattern more specific. Instead of recording “sugar made me foggy,” describe the event: what was eaten and how much, whether it was a drink or solid food, whether it was part of a large mixed meal, how hungry or tired you were beforehand, when the sensation began, what “fog” meant in that episode, and how long it lasted.
Next, separate subjective outcomes. Was the main change sleepiness, lower motivation, difficulty concentrating, slower word retrieval, headache, shakiness, anxiety, or genuine confusion? Those experiences point toward different questions. Brain fog becomes more informative when it is decomposed into the specific functions that changed.
Repeated observations are more informative than one event. A single episode has many possible explanations. A consistent pattern across similar circumstances is more useful information to bring to a clinician or dietitian, especially when symptoms interfere with daily functioning.
General public-health guidance can still be followed independently of brain fog. WHO recommends reducing free sugars to less than 10% of total energy intake and suggests that reducing them below 5% may provide additional health benefits. Those recommendations are primarily grounded in outcomes such as unhealthy weight gain and dental caries, not in a claim that sugar reduction cures brain fog.
Will cutting out sugar cure brain fog?
There is no established evidence that eliminating all dietary sugar is a general treatment for brain fog. A person may notice a change after modifying diet, but that observation does not reveal which component of the change mattered. Reducing added or free sugars may alter meal composition, beverage intake, total energy intake, caffeine patterns, eating timing, expectations, and many other variables at the same time.
There is also no scientific need to interpret ordinary sugar reduction as a “detox.” Sugar is a dietary component, not a toxin that must be purged from the body. If the goal is general nutrition rather than symptom investigation, practical changes can focus on added and free sugars while preserving nutritionally useful foods such as whole fruit.
When brain fog deserves broader medical attention
Brain fog that is persistent, worsening, severe, newly disruptive, or present across many situations deserves a broader assessment rather than a narrow assumption about sugar. The same applies when cognitive symptoms occur with fainting, marked confusion, new neurological symptoms, or other concerning changes.
A clinician can evaluate the full pattern, medications, sleep, mental health, neurological symptoms, nutrition, and other medical factors. The purpose is not to turn every episode of fogginess into disease; it is to avoid letting an attractive food explanation obscure a more relevant cause.
Evidence status: what is established, plausible, and uncertain?
Established
Brain fog is a nonspecific subjective term covering multiple cognitive, fatigue, and affective experiences. Acute glucose and sucrose studies do not show one universal cognitive effect. Controlled carbohydrate research does not support a reliable sugar-rush improvement in mood and does show increased fatigue or reduced alertness in some early post-consumption comparisons. Long-term observational studies sometimes associate higher added-sugar or sugar-sweetened-beverage intake with poorer cognitive outcomes.
Supported but context-dependent
Acute glucose can improve immediate recall in some experimental conditions. Glycemic load can influence some later memory outcomes, but pooled findings are limited and timing-dependent. Expectations can influence some mood or performance outcomes, yet expectancy effects are not consistent across measures.
Plausible interpretation
A post-sweet-food feeling of brain fog may arise from a combination of fatigue, reduced alertness, meal timing, baseline hunger, attention demands, expectation, and the interpretation of internal sensations. Which factor dominates is likely to differ across people and situations.
Not established
It is not established that ordinary dietary sugar universally causes brain fog, that every episode is caused by a “blood sugar crash,” that subjective fogginess identifies a glucose disorder, or that eliminating all sugar is a general cure.
Common myths about sugar and brain fog
“Sugar always makes the brain foggy.”
Human intervention studies do not support that universal claim. Results vary by cognitive domain, dose, timing, baseline state, and study design.
“If I feel foggy after sugar, my blood sugar must have crashed.”
A subjective symptom does not establish a measured glucose pattern. Blood-glucose disorders require appropriate medical evaluation; brain fog alone does not identify them.
“The brain needs glucose, so candy is brain fuel.”
The brain relies heavily on glucose, but glucose can become available from many foods and normal metabolism. Added sugar is not required as a cognitive supplement.
“If I cut all sugar and feel better, sugar was definitely the cause.”
Diet changes alter many variables at once. Improvement is useful personal information, but it does not isolate a single mechanism without a more controlled comparison.
“Brain fog after sugar means ADHD.”
No. Difficulty focusing after eating does not diagnose ADHD. ADHD is a clinical neurodevelopmental condition with its own diagnostic criteria and developmental history. Food-related attention changes cannot establish it. For the dedicated broad sugar-and-ADHD evidence review, see Sugar and ADHD: What Research Shows and What It Does Not.
Frequently asked questions
Can sugar cause brain fog?
Sugar can coincide with a foggy feeling, and carbohydrate intake can increase fatigue or reduce alertness in some acute comparisons. Human evidence does not show a universal sugar-induced brain-fog syndrome or one mechanism that explains every episode.
Why do I feel brain fog after eating sugar?
Possible contributors include fatigue or lower alertness, meal composition and timing, baseline hunger, task demands, expectations, and another factor that happens to coincide with eating. The symptom itself cannot identify which explanation is correct.
How long does sugar brain fog last?
Research does not establish a single duration for “sugar brain fog” because the term does not describe one defined physiological event. If fogginess reliably persists for hours, recurs often, or interferes with functioning, the pattern deserves broader evaluation rather than a fixed online timetable.
Is brain fog after sugar the same as a sugar crash?
They can overlap, especially when “brain fog” means fatigue or lower alertness, but the terms are not identical. Brain fog is a subjective cognitive label; sugar crash is a popular energy-and-alertness label.
Can sugar make it harder to focus?
Some people report that experience, but controlled studies are mixed. Some experiments find no focus impairment and a few find task-specific improvements. There is no reliable rule that sugar always worsens concentration.
Can sugar affect memory?
Yes, under some experimental conditions, but the direction depends on the question. Acute glucose has sometimes improved immediate recall, while longer-term observational studies have linked higher added-sugar or sugar-sweetened-beverage intake with poorer cognitive outcomes.
Does fruit cause the same brain fog as added sugar?
Whole fruit is a different food matrix and its naturally occurring sugars are not classified as Added Sugars by the FDA. A personal symptom after a specific fruit should be evaluated as that specific pattern rather than generalized to all fruit.
Does cutting sugar improve mental clarity?
It may change how some people feel, but there is no established universal brain-fog treatment based on eliminating all sugar. If a dietary change helps, consider what else changed at the same time and whether the effect repeats.
Should I check my blood sugar because I feel foggy after sweets?
Brain fog alone cannot determine whether blood glucose is abnormal. Decisions about glucose testing are medical questions that depend on symptoms, history, risk factors, and clinical judgment rather than on the phrase “sugar brain fog.”
When should I talk to a clinician?
Seek broader medical assessment when brain fog is persistent, worsening, severe, newly disruptive, or accompanied by concerning symptoms such as fainting, marked confusion, or new neurological changes. Recurrent symptoms that meaningfully affect work, school, driving, or daily functioning also deserve evaluation.
Related Articles
References
Alim-Marvasti A, Ciocca M, Kuleindiren N, Lin A, Selim H, Mahmud M. (2024). Subjective brain fog: a four-dimensional characterization in 25,796 participants. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 18, 1409250. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2024.1409250. PubMed
Denno P, Zhao S, Husain M, Hampshire A. (2025). Defining brain fog across medical conditions. Trends in Neurosciences, 48(5), 330–348. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2025.01.003. PubMed
Gaylor CM, Benton D, Brennan A, Young HA. (2022). The impact of glycaemic load on cognitive performance: A meta-analysis and guiding principles for future research. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 141, 104824. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104824. PubMed
Giles GE, Avanzato BF, Mora B, Jurdak NA, Kanarek RB. (2018). Sugar intake and expectation effects on cognition and mood. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 26(3), 302–309. doi:10.1037/pha0000182. PubMed
Gillespie KM, White MJ, Kemps E, Moore H, Dymond A, Bartlett SE. (2024). The Impact of Free and Added Sugars on Cognitive Function: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Nutrients, 16(1), 75. doi:10.3390/nu16010075. PubMed
Green MW, Taylor MA, Elliman NA, Rhodes O. (2001). Placebo expectancy effects in the relationship between glucose and cognition. British Journal of Nutrition, 86(2), 173–179. doi:10.1079/BJN2001398. PubMed
Liu H, Liu Y, Shi M, Zhou Y, Zhao Y, Xia Y. (2022). Meta-analysis of sugar-sweetened beverage intake and the risk of cognitive disorders. Journal of Affective Disorders, 313, 177–185. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2022.06.048. PubMed
Mantantzis K, Schlaghecken F, Sünram-Lea SI, Maylor EA. (2019). Sugar rush or sugar crash? A meta-analysis of carbohydrate effects on mood. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 101, 45–67. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.03.016. PubMed
McWhirter L. (2025). Brain fog. Practical Neurology, 25(2), 137–142. doi:10.1136/pn-2024-004112. PubMed
Mergenthaler P, Lindauer U, Dienel GA, Meisel A. (2013). Sugar for the brain: the role of glucose in physiological and pathological brain function. Trends in Neurosciences, 36(10), 587–597. doi:10.1016/j.tins.2013.07.001. PubMed
Philippou E, Constantinou M. (2014). The influence of glycemic index on cognitive functioning: a systematic review of the evidence. Advances in Nutrition, 5(2), 119–130. PubMed
Reche García C, Piernas C, Martínez-Rodríguez A, Hernández-Morante JJ. (2021). Effect of glucose and sucrose on cognition in healthy humans: a systematic review and meta-analysis of interventional studies. Nutrition Reviews, 79(2), 171–187. doi:10.1093/nutrit/nuaa036. PubMed
Reche García C, Piernas C, Martínez-Rodríguez A, Hernández-Morante JJ. (2018). Effects of glucose and sucrose on mood: a systematic review of interventional studies. Nutrition Reviews, 76(2), 108–116. PubMed
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2026). Added Sugars on the Nutrition Facts Label. FDA
World Health Organization. (2015). Guideline: Sugars Intake for Adults and Children. WHO