A large Brazilian study, published in the journal Neurology, followed 12,772 adults over a period of approximately eight years.
Participants with the highest intake of artificial sweeteners experienced a 62 percent faster decline in memory and thinking compared with those who consumed the least.
According to the researchers, the difference corresponds to roughly 1.6 additional years of brain aging.
Individuals with a moderately high intake also showed a clearly faster decline compared with the low-intake group.
Also read: Scientists challenge claim of “spoonful” of plastic in the human brain
How the study was conducted
Participants were, on average, 52 years old at the start of the study. They completed dietary questionnaires and underwent cognitive testing several times during the study period.
Researchers examined seven different sweeteners, including aspartame, saccharin, and sorbitol.
They accounted for factors such as age, gender, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease.
According to the researchers, the findings demonstrate an association but do not prove that sweeteners directly harm the brain.
Also read: Traveling with a vape? Here it could lead to prison
Dietary data were based on participants’ self-reports, and not all types of sweeteners were included in the analysis.
Particularly vulnerable groups
The association was most pronounced among individuals under the age of 60. In this group, higher consumption was linked to greater declines in both language skills and overall cognitive function.
People with diabetes also showed a stronger association between sweetener intake and cognitive decline.
Six of the sweeteners examined were associated with faster deterioration, while tagatose did not show the same pattern.
Also read: Your daily diet may increase the risk of heart attack by 47 percent
The researchers emphasize the need for further studies to better understand the long-term consequences.
Sources: SciTechDaily, and Neurology.
Also read: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. says keto can cure schizophrenia - psychiatrist rejects the claim
This article is made and published by Ida-Marie Palm Varbæk, who may have used AI in the preparation.