That press release comes from the Endocrine Society. On their website page where the press release is published, we can also read this at the bottom:
Endocrinologists are at the core of solving the most pressing health problems of our time, from diabetes and obesity to infertility, bone health, and hormone-related cancers. The Endocrine Society is the worldís oldest and largest organization of scientists devoted to hormone research and physicians who care for people with hormone-related conditions.
I read the press release. There is not a single item or idea or concept or word or anything that even comes close to being relevant to "hormone research and physicians who care for people with hormone-related conditions". Two conclusions. The Endocrine Society doesn't do sucralose studies. That press release actually comes from a third party that doesn't want its identity known, and was passed through the Endocrine Society in order to borrow the Society's credibility.
The press release talks about stem cells. The Endocrine Society deals with hormones. Insulin and growth hormone are hormones, and they have eminently greater effects directly on stem cells than whatever synthetic crap we put in our mouths. For insulin for example, we have insulin-induced lipohypertrophy, which is fat tissue growth, or if we prefer an increase in the number of fat cells, which can only be achieved by differentiating stem cells - be telling them through insulin signaling to become fat cells. Insulin is also involved in a lesser effect on existing fat tissue, through activation of lipoprotein lipase, esterification, glycerol, etc. Since we already know about these phenomena, and we likely know the potency of insulin in this respect, we have a reliable point of reference against which we can compare and establish the potency of other mechanisms by which this or similar phenomenon can occur, i.e. sucralose and glucose transporters and oxygen radicals which the press release talks about. Yet there is no mention of any existing and well known similar phenomenon in that press release, let alone no mention of anything that resembles a hormone.
OK, Imma just gonna declare the Endocrine Society has been usurped. It's a mighty big word to use - usurped - but dude, really. Anyways, usurped by whom? The sugar dudes. They've been doing that crap forever - shifting the blame to other stuff like fat and saturated fat and synthetic sweeteners - it's business as usual for them. Can't trust the Endocrine Society anymore, not that I ever did before, but now it's for sure, Jack.
OK, rant over. Let's see if there's anything in there we can use here in the context of low-carb. Do we use synthetic sweeteners? Probably. Do any of us who use them note any effect either way on initial fat loss or subsequent maintenance once we reached goal, or even excess fat accumulation we can't explain otherwise? Compare to what? There is no comparision in the press release, we have to find our own thing to compare to. Imma say it's very unlikely that synthetic sweeteners have any significant effect that can somehow turn low-carb on its head. LC is about as reliable as opening a door, and just walking through.