#Cvd

A ubiquitous sugar substitute found in Thai supermarkets, bakeries, bubble tea shops, and increasingly in “health” products, erythritol, has emerged as a fresh concern for heart health. Recent scientific studies—including a major investigation led by the University of Colorado Boulder—reveal that consuming even a typical serving of erythritol may rapidly trigger changes in blood vessels and platelets that set the stage for heart attack and stroke. With sugar-free and “keto” diets growing in popularity across Thailand, these findings carry weighty implications for millions of Thai consumers who have long considered erythritol as a harmless alternative to sugar.

A familiar sugar substitute found across Thai supermarkets, bakeries, and bubble tea shops is drawing renewed scrutiny. Erythritol, popular in sugar-free and “health” products, may trigger immediate changes in blood vessels and platelets that increase the risk of heart attack and stroke. With many Thais turning to sugar-free and keto options, these findings carry significant implications for millions who view erythritol as harmless.

Erythritol is a sugar alcohol produced by fermenting corn or wheat starch. It is marketed as a natural, low-calorie option suitable for people with diabetes or those following low-carb regimens. Regulators in the United States and Southeast Asia have approved its use, helping it become widespread in beverages, snacks, toothpaste, and personal care items. Unlike some sugar alcohols, it typically causes little digestive upset, which adds to its popularity.

A new review published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition has reignited an ongoing debate over the health risks of red meat, revealing that who pays for the research may significantly influence its conclusions. The review, led by researchers at Francisco de Vitoria University in Spain, found that studies funded by the red meat industry are nearly four times as likely to report favorable or neutral cardiovascular outcomes compared to independently funded counterparts—a trend that raises urgent questions about scientific impartiality and consumer trust in dietary guidance (nytimes.com).

A fresh review in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition questions how funding sources may shape conclusions in red meat research. Led by researchers from Francisco de Vitoria University in Spain, the study found that industry-funded trials are nearly four times more likely to report favorable or neutral heart-related outcomes than independently funded studies. The findings raise important considerations about scientific integrity and how dietary guidance reaches readers and patients.