Sugary Drinks Linked to Stomach Cancer in 112,000 Adults; Diet Not

In an August 2026 prospective cohort study of 112,284 adults published in Gastro Hep Advances, drinking more than one sugar-sweetened beverage daily was linked to an increased risk of gastric cancer. Artificially sweetened beverages showed no statistically significant association. Because the research is observational, it shows a statistical link rather than direct causation.

Key takeaways

• Adults consuming more than one serving daily of sugar-sweetened beverages had an observed hazard ratio of 2.45 for gastric cancer compared to the lowest intake group.
• Artificially sweetened beverages were not associated with gastric cancer incidence in the fully adjusted statistical models.
• Absolute risk remains low because gastric cancer is relatively uncommon, and the total number of documented cases across the cohorts was 278.
• Observational findings cannot prove cause and effect, and a null result for diet beverages does not prove they are entirely safe.
• Shoppers can verify drink contents by checking the "Includes Xg Added Sugars" line and reading sweetener names on the Nutrition Facts panel.

What happened

In August 2026, researchers published an analysis in Gastro Hep Advances examining the long-term relationship between beverage choices and stomach cancer incidence. The authors (Gweon T-G, Ha J, Kim H, Du M, Song M and Chan AT) analysed participants enrolled in two large, decades-long American cohorts: the Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study.

The research tracked 112,284 participants across approximately 3.2 million person-years of follow-up. Over that time, 278 cases of gastric cancer were documented (140 in women and 138 in men). Beverage intake was first collected on the 1986 questionnaires, which served as the baseline, and participants completed validated food-frequency questionnaires.

Sugar-sweetened beverages were defined as carbonated beverages, punch, lemonade and sports drinks; artificially sweetened beverages were low-calorie carbonated beverages. One serving was 8 ounces, and the lowest intake group was 'never use', meaning less than one serving a month.

What changed

When researchers compared participants drinking more than one serving per day of sugar-sweetened beverages to those in the never-use group, they observed an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.45 (95% CI 1.49-4.04).

When stratified by sex, the association appeared in both cohorts. Among women in the Nurses' Health Study, consuming more than one sugar-sweetened beverage per day showed a hazard ratio of 3.04 (95% CI 1.46-6.33) compared to the lowest intake group. Among men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, the hazard ratio was 1.99 (95% CI 1.00-3.93).

In contrast, artificially sweetened beverages showed no statistically significant association with gastric cancer risk in this report from Gastro Hep Advances.

To isolate the role of drinks, investigators adjusted their statistical models for a wide array of potential confounding factors. These included body mass index (BMI), total caloric intake, cigarette smoking history, alcohol consumption, diabetes status, physical activity levels, overall diet quality (the Alternative Healthy Eating Index-2010), and use of multivitamins, H2 blockers, proton pump inhibitors and aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.

Who is affected

The scope of this study centers on adults consuming packaged beverages, but interpreting who is affected requires understanding both the study population and the biological limitations outlined by the authors.

Participants were nurses and other health professionals, predominantly White, first enrolled between ages 30 and 75. Because baseline stomach cancer incidence and dietary habits can vary significantly across diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds, the authors say they could not examine associations within racial-ethnic subgroups or in younger adults.

The authors list limited information on Helicobacter pylori infection (an established gastric cancer risk factor), the location of the tumour in the stomach, family history of gastric cancer and history of upper endoscopy.

Furthermore, the total number of cancer cases was modest: 278 diagnoses among 112,284 people. Because total events were low, the confidence intervals around the hazard ratios are wide, ranging from 1.49 to 4.04 in the primary pooled estimate. This statistical spread indicates uncertainty regarding the exact magnitude of relative risk.

It is also essential to distinguish relative risk from absolute risk. In the United States, gastric cancer is a relatively uncommon malignancy. An elevated relative hazard ratio of 2.45 means that compared with people who almost never drank sugary drinks, those drinking more than one a day had a higher rate within the cohort. However, because the baseline risk of developing gastric cancer remains low in the general population, the change in an individual's absolute risk remains small.

What it means for shoppers

For shoppers standing in front of the grocery cooler, these findings do not warrant immediate panic, nor do they prove that drinking a soda causes cancer. Observational studies point to associations that warrant further mechanistic research; they do not establish direct biological causation.

Similarly, the null result observed for artificially sweetened drinks should not be interpreted as definitive proof of safety. A finding of "no statistically significant association" in one observational cohort simply means that within this group, diet drink consumption did not track with higher stomach cancer rates. It does not speak to other health outcomes or long-term metabolic considerations.

When evaluating drinks on supermarket shelves, shoppers can review packaging under current U.S. Food and Drug Administration rules to understand exactly what sweeteners are present:

• Check the serving size: Many bottled beverages contain 16 or 20 fluid ounces, which manufacturers may designate as more than one serving. Always look at the "per container" column on the Nutrition Facts panel.
• Inspect the "Includes Xg Added Sugars" line: Mandated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, this line reveals whether high-fructose corn syrup, cane sugar, or fruit juice concentrates have been added to the beverage.
• Review the ingredient list: If a beverage claims zero sugar or zero calories, the ingredient panel will list the non-nutritive sweetening agents, such as sucralose, aspartame, acesulfame potassium, stevia leaf extract, or monk fruit extract.

Consumers tracking beverage regulations and purchasing patterns may find context in ongoing policy debates, such as recent discussions surrounding SNAP Soda Bans: 18 States Open for Comment After a 12% Sales Drop, or international measures like how the UK Sugar Levy Will Cover Milkshakes and Plant Milks From 2028. For the many label names sugar goes by, see Added Sugar Has Dozens of Label Names: The Ones to Know, and for two zero-sugar sodas side by side, Fresca vs Diet Coke: Two Zero-Sugar Sodas, Two Different Labels.

The background

The authors describe gastric cancer as the fourth leading cause of cancer death worldwide, with established risk factors including Helicobacter pylori infection, male sex, older age, alcohol and tobacco. They note that prior data on sugary drinks and gastric cancer are limited.

Large-scale prospective cohorts like the Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study provide valuable longitudinal tracking. Nevertheless, observational epidemiology always faces the challenge of residual confounding, meaning that heavy consumption of sugary drinks may cluster with other unmeasured lifestyle or dietary factors.

What to watch next

Following the publication of this cohort analysis, researchers will look for independent prospective studies that can track H. pylori status alongside beverage intake. Clarifying whether liquid sugars act synergistically with chronic bacterial gastritis or affect stomach lining inflammation independently remains an open question.

Public health agencies and nutritional guidelines committees will review these findings alongside broader evidence as they periodically update dietary advice regarding added sugars. Regulatory bodies do not revise dietary guidelines based on a single observational paper, but consistent signals across independent cohorts can influence long-term policy reviews.

In the meantime, consumers looking to understand what is in their drinks can inspect food labels directly. Aurascan is a free food-label scanner app currently in beta (accessible via iOS TestFlight, with a waitlist available for other platforms). Rather than assigning an arbitrary, black-box numeric score to a product, Aurascan analyzes labels ingredient by ingredient using cited scientific evidence. It aggregates product information from Open Food Facts, the USDA, and barcode databases, with citations checked by an automated verifier. Each ingredient is categorized individually (Clean, Mixed, or Flagged) without brand sponsorships. Download the app to scan your beverage labels and see clear, evidence-based ingredient breakdowns for yourself.