If I get any specific details concerning their fut

If I get any specific details concerning their future plans I'll share them if permission to do so is granted. In the mean time, let's keep it in perspective. Some research results aren't properly clarified, depending on the author(s).

In the explanation of results you provided, a key takeaway is this: studies with lab mice showed that "6-month sucralose consumption at the human acceptable daily intake (ADI) may increase the risk of developing tissue inflammation by disrupting the gut microbiota", and what many people don't realize is that the ADI is normally much higher than what the average consumer of nutritionally enhanced beverages would ever drink (even ordinary soda pop), therefore posing a greatly reduced risk of any adverse effects. Nevertheless, I'm sure they'll settle on the best option as they fine tune the sweeteners.

I believe the risk for this occurring is minimal and likely blown out of proportion, possibly even influenced by those with money and vested interests, such as those praising the use of sucrose like cane sugar over any artificial sweeteners, (which has been proven false worldwide). I've even see commercials within the past 2 years claiming that high fructose corn syrup wasn't bad for you "if you didn't eat too much", and the problem is it causes most people to EAT TOO MUCH. It's bad stuff.

Anyhow, I agree that label readers like myself and you/your wife continue to adjust personal preferences toward foods/beverages with the very best scores in the healthy category, so it's worth catering to if your aim is to become a favorite of label reading health conscious consumers. Again, I'll pass along anything I'm able to share if I learn specifically what changes are being considered.