couple eating dessert

Photo by Lu Sálvaro from Pexels

LUND, Sweden — Good news for dessert lovers: that occasional slice of cake might actually be doing you a favor. Researchers from Lund University are revealing that not all sugar is created equal, and your approach to sweet treats could be more nuanced than the traditional “just say no” health advice.

Their new study published in Frontiers in Public Health discovered something unexpected: while sugary drinks are a heart health hazard, occasional treats might actually provide some cardiovascular benefits. The study, which tracked nearly 70,000 Swedish participants over more than two decades, found that the context of sugar consumption matters just as much as the amount.

“The most striking finding from our study is the divergent relationship between different sources of added sugar and cardiovascular disease risk,” says Suzanne Janzi, the study’s lead researcher, in a media release.

This surprising insight challenges simplistic dietary guidelines that lump all sugar together. Specifically, the team examined how added sugar intake relates to seven different types of cardiovascular diseases, including stroke, heart failure, and heart attacks.

Scientists discovered that sweetened beverages pose the most significant threat to heart health. Drinking more than eight servings of sugary drinks per week was linked to higher risks of several cardiovascular conditions. Specifically, participants who consumed high amounts of sweetened beverages had a 19% higher risk of ischemic stroke, an 18% higher risk of heart failure, and a 31% higher risk of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Liquid sugars, found in sweetened beverages, typically provide less satiety than solid forms — they make you feel less full — potentially leading to overconsumption,” Janzi explains.

Young woman drinking soda
Drinking more than 8 servings of sugary drinks per week was linked to higher risks of several cardiovascular conditions. (© gabycampo – stock.adobe.com)

Surprisingly, the research found something unexpected about treats like pastries, ice cream, and chocolate. Contrary to what many might expect, people who consumed very few treats (two servings or less per week) actually had higher cardiovascular disease risks compared to those who consumed more.

The study followed participants between 45 and 83 years-old over more than two decades, making it one of the most comprehensive investigations of sugar’s long-term health impacts. Researchers collected detailed dietary information from participants in 1997 and again in 2009, tracking their sugar intake and subsequent health outcomes.

One of the most intriguing findings was how different sources of sugar seemed to have varying effects on heart health. While sweetened beverages consistently showed negative health associations, other sugar sources like table sugar, honey, and jams told a more complex story.

The most important takeaway? Moderation is key, and where you get your sugar matters. Participants consuming between 5% and 7.5% of their daily calories from added sugar actually showed lower risks of several cardiovascular diseases compared to those consuming higher amounts. With all that said, cutting back on sugary drinks might be a more effective health strategy than completely eliminating all sweet treats.

Paper Summary

Methodology

The study used data from two large Swedish population cohorts: the Swedish Mammography Cohort and the Cohort of Swedish Men. Participants completed detailed dietary questionnaires in 1997 and 2009, providing information about their sugar consumption across various food and beverage categories. Researchers then tracked participants’ health records, documenting new cardiovascular disease diagnoses over more than 20 years.

Key Results

The key findings showed complex relationships between sugar intake and heart health. Sweetened beverages were consistently linked to higher cardiovascular disease risks, while treats like pastries and chocolate showed unexpected protective associations. Added sugar intake between 5% and 10% of daily calories seemed to present the lowest overall health risks.

Study Limitations

The study was observational, meaning it could show associations but not definitively prove causation. Dietary information was self-reported, which can introduce some reporting errors. Additionally, about 39% of participants did not complete the follow-up questionnaire in 2009.

Discussion & Takeaways

The study emphasizes that not all sugar sources are equally harmful. Sweetened beverages appear to be the most problematic, while other sugar sources might have more nuanced effects. The findings suggest current dietary guidelines might need refinement, particularly regarding added sugar recommendations.

Funding & Disclosures

The research was funded by the Swedish Research Council, the Heart and Lung Foundation, and the Albert Påhlsson Foundation. The researchers declared no conflicts of interest, and the study was conducted independently through academic research institutions.

About StudyFinds Analysis

Called "brilliant," "fantastic," and "spot on" by scientists and researchers, our acclaimed StudyFinds Analysis articles are created using an exclusive AI-based model with complete human oversight by the StudyFinds Editorial Team. For these articles, we use an unparalleled LLM process across multiple systems to analyze entire journal papers, extract data, and create accurate, accessible content. Our writing and editing team proofreads and polishes each and every article before publishing. With recent studies showing that artificial intelligence can interpret scientific research as well as (or even better) than field experts and specialists, StudyFinds was among the earliest to adopt and test this technology before approving its widespread use on our site. We stand by our practice and continuously update our processes to ensure the very highest level of accuracy. Read our AI Policy (link below) for more information.

Our Editorial Process

StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate. We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves. All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.

Our Editorial Team

Steve Fink

Editor-in-Chief

John Anderer

Associate Editor

Leave a Reply