Contact Us
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
© 2025 Jeifer Pharmaceutical, All Right
Reserved.
Sucrose, as most folks know it, traces deep into human culture. For centuries, sugarcane and sugar beet fueled far more than kitchen tables. In medicine, refined sucrose gained attention long before it earned a spot in intravenous fluids. Early chemists in the 19th century recognized its stability, which set sucrose apart from glucose in certain solutions. By the mid-20th century, hospitals began incorporating pharmaceutical-grade sucrose for injection as a safer osmotic agent and stabilizer, especially for newborn and pediatric care. Over time, standards like BP (British Pharmacopoeia), EP (European Pharmacopoeia), and USP (United States Pharmacopeia) have set strict requirements, protecting patients from contaminants that can hide in less-refined sugars. Today, the product stands as a result of decades of development in purification, testing, and real-world clinical feedback.
Pharmaceutical-grade sucrose for injection isn't the granulated sweetener familiar in pantries. It's a specialized, medicinal product that's produced under heavily controlled conditions. Each batch meets guidelines for purity and bacterial endotoxin limits. In practice, manufacturers supply sucrose as a white, crystalline powder or as sterile concentrates for dilution. Hospitals and research centers use these forms when a non-fermentable, non-ionizing carbohydrate is needed in intravenous solutions. Sucrose's primary role leans on its chemical stability, non-toxicity, and low reactivity in aqueous environments, which sets it apart from many alternatives and cements its role in pharmacy compounding and biotech fields.
Sucrose has a clear chemical identity: C12H22O11. Under normal storage, the substance appears as white, odorless crystals that dissolve readily in water. Sucrose solutions are naturally clear or just slightly opalescent, never cloudy—any cloudiness flags contamination or degradation. The melting point of pure sucrose hovers just above 185°C, and it breaks down quickly at high temperatures, forming caramel. Sucrose isn't hygroscopic in its pure form, so it stores well if kept dry and sealed from atmospheric moisture and other volatile substances. Pharmacists and manufacturers prefer sucrose’s consistent solubility and pH neutrality, crucial for maintaining integrity in injectable solutions that go into veins, not just into lab test tubes.
Every container of pharmaceutical-grade sucrose for injection carries a heavy set of specifications. Labels always list the grade—BP, EP, or USP—offering transparency for regulatory inspectors and hospital pharmacists. The packaging also lists batch numbers, expiration dates, and storage conditions, which are non-negotiable in medical supply chains. Maximum acceptable levels of ash, sulfated ash, heavy metals, bacterial endotoxins, and microbial counts are set in stone, found both on paperwork and periodically confirmed by laboratory checks. Sucrose for injection never comes with hidden sodium ions, preservatives, or coloring. Any deviation from label specs risks patient safety and legal headaches for producers and medical providers alike.
Reliable sucrose for injection starts with quality raw cane or beet sugar. Refineries extract raw sugar, then send it through repeated dissolution, recrystallization, carbon filtration, and strict decolorizing. Each round of purification strips away plant-based residues, proteins, and trace minerals that can trigger allergic or immune responses. After final crystallization, sucrose is thoroughly dried, sieved for particle size, and autoclaved or irradiated to meet sterility requirements. Aseptic techniques dominate every stage. Final containers either ship sterile (for dry powders) or undergo terminal sterilization if distributed as a ready-to-use liquid. At every step, chemists monitor for endotoxin spikes, because even trace bacterial waste products can upend patient treatment and trust in the supply chain.
In most settings, sucrose acts as a chemical placeholder rather than a reactive ingredient. It resists breakdown in simple salt solutions, which makes it suitable for infusion products. Under acid catalysis or via enzymatic hydrolysis (sucrase), it can split into glucose and fructose. Industrial chemists sometimes modify sucrose molecules to anchor drugs or conjugate proteins for targeted therapies. Outside injection, researchers also test cross-linking with sucrose derivatives in scaffold or hydrogel development. Still, for most injectable applications, the best results come from unmodified, high-purity sucrose because chemical side reactions risk side effects or unpredictable patient responses.
Medical supply catalogs won’t always call it “sucrose (for injection).” Synonyms include saccharose and alpha-D-glucopyranosyl-beta-D-fructofuranoside. Some documentation lists the product by its approved pharmacopoeial designation, such as Sucrosum BP or Sucrose EP. In global trade, “pharma grade sucrose” signals that the product meets standards beyond food or reagent grades—crucial for sterile drug compounding, which brooks no compromise on trace contaminants or microbiological cleanliness. Medical device and solution manufacturers, especially those targeting the pediatric, dialysis, and cell therapy markets, list batch-specific “API (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient)” codes for tracking and recall.
Hospitals and drug makers don’t gamble with injectable excipients. Only pharma-grade sucrose earns a place on approved ingredient lists, supported by Certificates of Analysis and compliance with GMP (Good Manufacturing Practice) and GDP (Good Distribution Practice) guidelines. Storage protocols call for locked rooms, sealed packaging, temperature and humidity logs, and tight stock rotation. At the point of use, pharmacists inspect for clumping, discoloration, or odd odors, which signal breaches in quality. Regulatory bodies such as the FDA, EMA, and MHRA conduct surprise audits and demand evidence that staff have safety training and track-and-trace documentation from receiving through administration. Laboratories also retain reference samples from each batch for potential retesting if supply or post-marketing questions arise.
Pharmaceutical sucrose for injection serves hospital wards as a stabilizing agent in large-volume parenterals, eye surgery adjuncts, dialysis infusions, and preservation of biological samples. Pediatric departments use sucrose solutions to reduce procedural pain, especially in newborns. Researchers select sucrose as a non-toxic cryoprotectant for sensitive cell lines or embryos in fertility labs. Some vaccine and antibody producers depend on high-purity sucrose to keep active ingredients stable during freeze-drying. Product development in gene therapy and regenerative medicine continues to lean on sucrose as a non-immunogenic, osmotically balanced base for new injectable cocktails. In short, the compound allows countless therapies to stay potent right up until they reach the patient.
Sucrose for injection attracts continuous R&D, especially as new biologics and cell-based therapies hit the pipeline. Some teams experiment with nanoformulations, where sucrose acts as a carrier or scaffold. Others look into fine-tuning particle size for better dissolution and stability in highly sensitive therapies. Because every new pharmaceutical compound presents unique stability challenges, there’s always a demand for head-to-head studies, comparing how sucrose stacks up next to newer osmolytes or synthetic excipients. Real-world clinical needs—cheaper cancer drugs, improved organ preservation, pain control for the very young—fuel the need for ongoing testing, innovation, and regulatory cooperation. Investments in advanced filtration, faster sterility testing, and automated weighing and filling systems improve consistency and reduce human error at every step.
Sucrose is not toxic by ordinary routes, but injectable use demands rigorous research. Scientists assess acute and long-term toxicity in both animals and humans, looking for kidney load, allergic responses, metabolism bottlenecks, and immune shifts. Most studies agree that high-purity sucrose does not trigger hemolysis or organ toxicity at therapeutic doses, although excess osmotic loads remain a practical limitation in infants and frail patients. Analytical labs monitor for rare contaminants from the extraction or sterilization process because those trace compounds, not the sucrose itself, present the greatest risks in vulnerable populations. Regulatory groups require periodic review of published toxicology and mandate full transparency of all process aids and starting materials for every product batch.
Demand for injectable sucrose continues climbing as global biopharma and clinical care expand. Future horizons likely include more targeted excipient design, tailored for gene therapy, tissue engineering, and stem cell work. Advanced analytics such as high-resolution mass spectrometry and real-time contamination monitoring promise to cut batch failures and raise confidence among regulators and patients. Sucrose’s biocompatibility, centuries-long safety record, and relative abundance keep it central in the search for affordable, effective injectable solutions. Emerging global health efforts and the drive to reduce infant mortality in underserved regions point to a growing need for sucrose-based therapeutic solutions, challenging producers and regulators to broaden access, drive down costs, and continue refining standards for safety, purity, and sustainability.
Many folks think of sucrose as table sugar, something that sweetens coffee or cereal in the morning. In a hospital or clinic, though, pharma grade sucrose for injection brings something entirely different to the table. Doctors and pharmacists use this substance for a bunch of medical reasons, and most people never hear about it unless a loved one needs a treatment that relies on it.
This isn’t the kind of sugar that comes from the supermarket. To carry the BP, EP, and USP labels, the sucrose batch gets tested—even scrutinized—for purity and safety. These rules come from the world’s leading pharmacopeias: British (BP), European (EP), and United States (USP). Each organization demands high standards because injectable products go straight into the blood, leaving no room for contaminants or impurities.
Sucrose in this form supports lives in some of the smallest and most fragile patients: premature babies. In neonatal intensive care units, health teams use small doses of sucrose during minor procedures to help manage pain. Clinical studies back this up, showing that a tiny amount by mouth eases distress during heel prick tests or IV insertions. No miracle cure, but the effect is real enough for hospitals across the world to stock it.
Blood banks lean on sucrose, too, especially in the making of certain iron supplements such as iron sucrose injections. Doctors give these to patients whose bodies can’t absorb enough iron from diet alone—often people with kidney conditions or chronic anemia. The sucrose acts as a carrier for iron, helping it dissolve for slow release inside the body, bringing needed relief from fatigue and weakness.
Pharmaceutical companies turn to pharma grade sucrose for prepping IV fluids, vaccines, and biologic drugs. The science relies on its ability to protect sensitive molecules, keeping vaccines stable from factory to doctor’s office. Without it, storage and shipping would cause breakdowns, leading to wasted medicine and lost trust.
Anyone getting an injection, especially babies or critically ill patients, deserves the safest ingredients. Impurities, even trace ones, can trigger allergic reactions, raise fevers, or introduce toxins. Companies run batch after batch through strict screening, often tracing sources down to the field and refinery. Regulatory bodies keep a close eye on audits, responding quickly to any flagged batch. This attention to detail helps patients—and their families—sleep easier at night.
Some fear anything labeled “sugar” when it comes to medicine, worried about unhealthy spikes in blood sugar or long-term effects. In practice, the amounts doctors use for pain relief or drug formulation stay far below the levels that would cause trouble, even for folks with diabetes. Still, hospitals monitor every patient closely and choose other options when risk goes up.
The world keeps seeking new ways to deliver medicine and relieve pain without adding harm or risk. Sucrose for injection has earned its spot in the toolkit for now, thanks to both tradition and modern research. More studies could help pinpoint which patients benefit most, maybe even unlocking new uses few have thought about yet. Good medicine depends on questioning, testing, and always pushing for better safety.
Walk into any pharmacy, pick up a cough syrup, and odds are, the sweet kick you taste comes from pharmaceutical grade sucrose. This isn’t your average table sugar. The standards behind that sweetness run much deeper. With every dose, patients trust they’re not getting an unknown chemical cocktail along with their medicine. Purity tells the whole story.
Strict rules guide the use of sucrose in medicines. Pharmacopoeias like USP-NF or Ph. Eur. call the shots. Sucrose hits the mark for color, odor, and taste—colorless or white crystals that allow no room for off-notes or musty smells. Water content must stay below 0.1%, keeping clumping and microbial growth out.
Crop sources matter, but most folks look straight at the specs. On the purity front, regulators usually set the bar at 99.5% or higher. Even a few points below, and that sugar doesn’t cut it. Ash content, a marker of non-sugar residue, tops out at 0.05%. Tests go after everything: lead, arsenic, and other heavy metals—nothing more than a few parts per million, often lower. Chloride and sulfate levels run through fine-toothed combs, with limits set well below what you’d find in regular ingredients.
Trace contaminants sound minor in theory. Experience says otherwise. Sucrose often isn’t just a filler or sweetener. It carries the drug, acting as a bulking agent for tiny tablets or forming the backbone of syrups that travel into vulnerable bodies. Someone with a chronic condition or a young child relies on the promise that nothing toxic sneaks in.
Microbial purity stands alongside chemical purity. Batches go through bacterial and fungal screens. No Escherichia coli, Salmonella, or mold can hide in these crystals. Once, a poorly purified supply sparked recalls after microbes snuck in, risking infections. Every batch, every time—the standards stand unbending.
Most manufacturers keep their eye on the ball using validated analytical techniques. Polarimetry checks optical rotation to ensure only natural sucrose winds up in the bag. Chromatography spots organic impurities. Titration traces the faintest hints of acid or base. Each bag sits with a certificate of analysis listing every spec, every result. It’s the only way to keep trust in the supply chain.
For small companies, meeting these standards tops the budget sheet. Analytical labs, rigorous documentation, supplier audits—these don’t come cheap. Skimping, though, leads straight to regulatory disaster. Regulators like FDA or EMA never hand out warnings politely. They show up, inspect, shut down noncompliant lines, and make those failures public knowledge.
A road forward calls for stronger support systems for newer or smaller players. Shared reference labs, better traceability tech, and supplier transparency could keep everyone honest while trimming small-scale costs. Education also makes a difference. Lab staff and procurement managers benefit from keeping up with the ever-evolving patchwork of global standards.
Pharmaceutical grade sucrose means more than sweetness. It means safety and certainty in a dose. Years spent in regulated production environments have taught me that no shortcut—in method or money—can mirror the peace of mind delivered by strict purity standards. People depend on it, often without realizing how much science and care hide beneath that hint of sweetness.
Sucrose doesn’t just sweeten your coffee. In the pharmaceutical industry, it takes on a much bigger job. Sucrose gets used in formulations that go straight into the body, either through infusions, vaccines, or critical biologics. Every time I talk with pharmacists or clinical staff, one thing’s clear: patients and health workers want reassurance that what’s being injected won’t introduce unexpected risks. Contaminated injections can mean infections, immune responses, or other dangers. So, whether sucrose carries contaminants like pyrogens or bacteria isn’t a side issue; it’s a life-or-death concern.
Walking through a facility preparing pharma grade sucrose, the strict procedures stand out. The difference between food grade and pharma grade boils down to standards. For pharma grade sucrose, the stakes stay higher. Production involves rigorous purification, constant microbial testing, endotoxin checks, and strict packaging controls. Technicians don’t wear standard lab coats—they wear full protective gear. Equipment goes through validation cycles. Surface swabs, air tests, and microbial plates track every batch and every surface.
A genuine pharma grade sucrose, labeled for injection and marked BP, EP, or USP, means it meets those global pharmacopoeial rules. Those three standards spell out the chemical purity, how free the sucrose is from toxins and microbes, and the sterility requirements. Testing for pyrogens—substances that can cause fevers—remains one crucial step. In the lab, that involves rabbit tests or bacterial endotoxin tests, often with limulus amebocyte lysate (LAL). If a batch carries pyrogens, it’s rejected before it gets anywhere near a vial or a syringe.
Even with these precautions, history reminds us nothing is bulletproof. Recalls have popped up over the years, not only for sucrose but for excipients overall, because a sterilizer failed, a filter fouled, or an operator missed a step. I remember reading about a South East Asian plant that traced pyrogen contamination back to poorly cleaned holding tanks. That mistake cost far more than money; patients landed in intensive care. Regulators like the FDA, EMA, or Indian authorities keep a sharp eye because one contaminated batch can cause a huge ripple effect across hospitals and clinics.
Any contamination—bacterial or chemical—means real-world harm. It’s not only about fevers. Endotoxins can trigger septic shock in vulnerable patients. For sick kids, transplant recipients, and the elderly, risks escalate. Even less severe reactions can erode trust in injectable medicines.
No system works perfectly, but several steps cut down the odds. Closed-system manufacturing and single-use technologies help, as they reduce opportunities for microbes to sneak in. Real-time environmental monitoring, hands-on operator training, and batch tracking all matter a lot. Regular audits keep everyone honest—internal reviews, supplier qualification, documentation checks. For companies, it pays to stay connected to the most current pharmacopeial updates and local regulatory changes. Being caught off-guard by a new guideline not only disrupts production, but it also puts patients at risk.
One thing I always tell new hires: sterile doesn’t just happen because a label says so. It takes diligence, proper tools, and a culture that refuses shortcuts. Doctors and patients count on these small details every single time they hook up an IV or prepare a vaccine. Pharma grade sucrose for injection must deliver the safety and purity everyone expects, every step of the way.
Stepping into any grocery store, shelves packed with colorful boxes and bottles give us plenty to look at. Packaging keeps more than just a product tidy. It sets the tone for how safe food or supplements stay before reaching home. Over the years, I’ve found that the choice between plastic, glass, paper, or metal goes beyond cost-saving. Some small brands swear by glass jars, even though shipping rates stretch their budgets, simply because glass keeps moisture and air out. Plastics work for short runs. Still, with rising awareness about BPA and microplastics, you see more brands shifting toward safe options. Metal cans block light better than any clear material could. Paper pouches feel lighter for travel, but they won’t last as long on a humid shelf.
A friend once bought bulk olive oil packed in clear PET bottles from a local market. The first bottle tasted fine; the last was cloudy and flat. Light, air, and even small flaws in the cap trim months from product life. Freshness doesn’t always survive beyond the warehouse doors. Dairy or snacks in thin packaging lose crunch or spoil before the date on the box. For items like dried herbs, customers notice the flavor difference once a bag lets in outside air. Producers deal with temperature swings in storage and unpredictable supply chain delays, both chewing into shelf life.
Research from the Institute of Food Technologists shows that oxygen exposure slices the shelf life of perishables in half for every 1% increase in bag permeability. Multi-layered pouches, foil seals, and vacuum sealing extend shelf life for premium products—but not every farmer or small co-packer can afford them. The European Food Safety Authority warns against some recycled plastics in food wraps, citing chemical transfer to contents. A 2022 survey in Consumer Reports found that nearly one in five customers rejected items if outer seals or labels were even slightly damaged, linking packaging not just to safety but also to trust.
Most yogurt cups or soft drinks quote six months to a year, assuming perfect storage. Dried grains and pasta stretch longer, sometimes years, when wrapped tight and kept away from sun or damp. Natural beauty brands face headaches with preservative-free creams; 90 days can tick by before changes show in scent or texture. Pet food looks fresh weeks after manufacturing, but vitamins in it fade much faster than the kibble itself. Sometimes customers stash things at home and forget how quickly color changes in sunlight, learning the limits of packaging the hard way.
Producers and stores have good reasons to look for options that balance cost, safety, and convenience. My family business tried compostable wrappers last fall and lost a whole shipment to rain damage before sale. Switching to lined paper bags cut waste and hit a price point customers could accept. Some regional dairy farmers now deliver in glass bottles that they collect, wash, and reuse, which trims carbon footprints and builds a loyal local following. Heat-sealed mylar pouches, paired with small oxygen absorbers, bumped spice shelf life up by months in our store, with only a few cents added to cost per bag.
Customers pay close attention to expiry dates and storage tips. Clear labeling—showing not just the date, but how to keep things fresh—gives power back to shoppers. Producers who explain why they pack the way they do demystify shelf life and boost confidence. Everyone in the supply chain, from packer to end consumer, keeps food safer and longer by understanding packaging’s role. In my experience, the most sustainable package always starts with a clear look at both real-life shelf conditions and the honest needs of the folks who use and enjoy the product every day.
Ask anyone involved in manufacturing or lab work about safety, and documentation comes up just as much as goggles or gloves. A Certificate of Analysis and a Material Safety Data Sheet have become the questions people ask before a product even gets unpacked. The chemists want proof of quality, buyers want confidence, and the folks on the warehouse floor want to know what to do if someone accidentally spills the material or breathes something they shouldn’t.
I remember my time working in a small college research lab, the only thing between us and a room full of ruined experiments was a plain folder holding those sheets. It wasn’t fancy, but if you lost that folder chaos followed: missed safety precautions, wasted money on the wrong batch, and confusion that ripples out for days.
A Certificate of Analysis keeps things honest. It lists batch numbers, physical properties, and test results. No one likes gambling with raw materials. If the sodium chloride isn’t pure enough or the API in a pharmaceutical batch doesn’t hit the right percentage, it’s more than a minor inconvenience. It means everything that comes afterward is built on bad data. Pharma giants and food manufacturers take this seriously. Based on the latest guidelines, manufacturers such as Pfizer and Nestlé require suppliers to provide up-to-date CoAs before shipments even land at the loading dock. This industry-wide push stems from real recall disasters that cost millions and, in some cases, harmed people.
The MSDS, lately called SDS, is about risk. Details about toxicity, spill procedures, and fire hazards live there. Picture a janitor finding a broken bottle of solvent after hours. Without an MSDS, no one knows if water makes it worse or what sort of mask fits the bill. OSHA knows the risks—improper labeling or a missing MSDS racks up thousands of dollars in fines. Worse, it endangers lives. In my experience, nobody regrets spending extra time hunting for the document when an accident happens.
Quality documentation does a lot of heavy lifting for trust between companies. Imagine a food company importing cinnamon—adulteration scandals over the past decade forced new rules in global trade. CoA requirements cut down on fraud, as shown by international recalls of contaminated spices or tainted pet food from poorly regulated countries. If something looks off in a document, a trained eye can catch fake numbers or lab names, preventing another food poisoning headline.
Small businesses sometimes hesitate to chase all this paperwork, seeing it as red tape. But it’s a one-time cost that keeps doors open. Without the right documentation, insurance becomes trickier and loss claims hang in limbo. Factories that ignore MSDS rules run higher injury rates and face massive disruptions if anything ever goes wrong.
Making sure the CoA and MSDS are always up to date takes discipline. Digital records work best now. I’ve seen simple online document management software cut through the chaos, especially for small teams. Training should happen every few months, especially with staff turnover or new products. Some companies, like BASF and Dow, lead by sharing documents as soon as orders get placed, not just shipped. This gives customers time for internal review.
Industry groups now push suppliers to standardize formatting, and QR codes on packages link to the latest digital versions. Those small changes add up—they save time and cut confusion in fast-paced environments. Staying diligent about documentation builds a culture of safety, makes audits smoother, and saves more than just money in the long run.
| Names | |
| Preferred IUPAC name | (2R,3R,4S,5S,6R)-2-(hydroxymethyl)-6-[(2R,3R,4S,5S,6R)-2,3,4,5-tetrahydroxy-6-(hydroxymethyl)oxan-2-yl]oxyoxane-3,4,5-triol |
| Other names |
Saccharose Table Sugar β-D-Fructofuranosyl α-D-glucopyranoside |
| Pronunciation | /ˈsuː.kroʊs/ |
| Identifiers | |
| CAS Number | 57-50-1 |
| Beilstein Reference | **3568282** |
| ChEBI | CHEBI:17992 |
| ChEMBL | CHEMBL: CHEMBL5989 |
| ChemSpider | 2157 |
| DrugBank | DB09351 |
| ECHA InfoCard | 100.007.859 |
| EC Number | 200-334-9 |
| Gmelin Reference | Gmelin Reference: 83456 |
| KEGG | C00089 |
| MeSH | D02.705.400.800 |
| PubChem CID | 5988 |
| RTECS number | WN6500000 |
| UNII | 23X0O17CO3 |
| UN number | 'UN number': 'Not regulated' |
| CompTox Dashboard (EPA) | DTXSID7034364 |
| Properties | |
| Chemical formula | C12H22O11 |
| Molar mass | 342.30 g/mol |
| Appearance | White or almost white crystalline powder |
| Odor | Odorless |
| Density | 1.587 g/cm³ |
| Solubility in water | Soluble in water |
| log P | -3.7 |
| Vapor pressure | Negligible |
| Acidity (pKa) | 12.62 |
| Basicity (pKb) | 8.1 |
| Magnetic susceptibility (χ) | -9.52×10⁻⁶ |
| Refractive index (nD) | 1.457 (20°C) |
| Viscosity | Viscosity: 1.5 - 2.0 cP |
| Dipole moment | 0 D |
| Thermochemistry | |
| Std molar entropy (S⦵298) | 340 J·mol⁻¹·K⁻¹ |
| Std enthalpy of formation (ΔfH⦵298) | -2220 kJ/mol |
| Std enthalpy of combustion (ΔcH⦵298) | −5645 kJ/mol |
| Pharmacology | |
| ATC code | A10BX02 |
| Hazards | |
| Main hazards | May cause irritation to eyes, skin, and respiratory tract. |
| GHS labelling | Not a hazardous substance or mixture according to the Globally Harmonized System (GHS) |
| Pictograms | GHS07 |
| Hazard statements | No hazard statements. |
| Precautionary statements | Keep container tightly closed. Store in a cool, dry place. Use personal protective equipment as required. Avoid contact with skin and eyes. In case of inadequate ventilation wear respiratory protection. Wash hands thoroughly after handling. |
| NFPA 704 (fire diamond) | NFPA 704: 1-0-0 |
| Autoignition temperature | 210°C |
| Lethal dose or concentration | LD50 (oral, rat): 29,700 mg/kg |
| LD50 (median dose) | 29700 mg/kg (rat, oral) |
| PEL (Permissible) | 10 mg/m³ |
| REL (Recommended) | 10 mg/kg bw |
| IDLH (Immediate danger) | Not Listed |
| Related compounds | |
| Related compounds |
Dextrose Fructose Glucose Lactose Maltose Sorbitol Mannitol Trehalose |
Chengguan District, Lanzhou, Gansu, China
