A mango a day can keep diabetes away

 Study shows the benefits of foods with natural sugars versus added sugars

 If presented with two snacks, one containing seven grams of sugar and another with over 30 grams of sugar, choosing the healthier option should be a no-brainer, correct? Well, maybe not. Less sugar is not automatically healthier.  

For the nearly 100 million adults in the United States who are currently living with prediabetes, a tropical fruit that can reduce the risk of diabetes sounds too good to be true. Tropical fruits contain anywhere between ten to 50 grams of sugar, with mangos on the high end of the spectrum, making them seem a poor snack choice based on that alone. But research by clinical nutrition researcher Raedeh Basiri indicates that mangos, despite having more sugar than many low-sugar snacks, may offer protective factors for adults with prediabetes.  

“It is not just the sugar content that matters, but the overall food context that matters,” said Basiri, assistant professor in George Mason’s Department of Nutrition and Food Studies. This study is the first long-term clinical trial to demonstrate both metabolic and body composition benefits of mangoes in prediabetes. 

Simply put, it’s more than the sugar in the food; it’s about the whole food. The sugars naturally found in mangos, and other fruits, are complemented by fiber and other vitamins and nutrients that offer additional health benefits. Food with added sugar, such as breakfast cereals, and even low-sugar snack options, may not have the same nutritional value and can even increase diabetes risk. 

“The goal is to encourage people to include whole fruits, like mango, as part of healthy eating behaviors and practical dietary strategies for diabetes prevention,” said Basiri. “Individuals at high risk of diabetes should not only focus on the sugar content of foods, but on how sugars are delivered.” 

Basiri and her team split study participants into two groups; one group received a fresh mango daily, while the other group was given a low-sugar granola bar each day. Over six months, researchers measured participants’ blood glucose levels, bodily responses to insulin, and body fat.  

At the conclusion of the study, findings revealed that the high-sugar mango (32 grams of sugar) proved more beneficial than a low-sugar granola bar (11 grams of sugar). The group that consumed the daily mango showed improved blood glucose control, enhanced insulin sensitivity, and reduced body fat.   

Daily Mango Intake Improves Glycemic and Body Composition Outcomes in Adults with Prediabetes: A Randomized Controlled Study was published in Foods in August 2025.  

Soft Drink Consumption Associated with Higher Risk of Depression

 A new study involving the German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD) provides strong evidence that sugary drinks affect not only metabolic but also mental health – especially in women. This effect is probably mediated by the sensitive microbiome of the intestine.

As is well known, people who regularly consume sugary drinks not only have an increased risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and cancer. There is an increasing number of studies that are now showing that soft drinks can also affect mental health. So far, however, it was unclear whether there is a direct relation to major depressive disorder (MDD) and which biological processes might be involved. 

Soft Drink Consumption Associated with Higher Risk of Depression 

To answer these questions, researchers analyzed cross-sectional data from the Marburg-Münster Affective Cohort (MACS). The study examined adults between the ages of 18 and 65 who were recruited from the general population and primary care between 2014 and 2018. The researchers included a total of 932 people, 405 of whom were patients with major depression disorder and 527 were healthy controls. 

The analyses showed a correlation between soft drink consumption and both the diagnosis of depression and the severity of the symptoms. This correlation was particularly pronounced in women: Among them, high consumption was associated with a 17% higher probability of depression (odds ratio 1.167) and more severe symptoms.  

Changes in the Microbiome as a Key Factor 

But how could the effect be conveyed? Here, too, the study provides a possible explanation: In women who regularly drank sugary soft drinks, the researchers found a significantly increased number of bacteria of the Eggerthella genus in the intestine. Earlier studies had shown that Eggerthella is more common in people with depression. The current study now provides the first convincing evidence that this bacterium possibly plays a mediating role – as a biological link between the consumption of soft drinks and the development of depressive symptoms. 

“Our data suggests that the relation between soft drinks and depressive symptoms arises via the influence of the microbiome,” says study leader Dr. Sharmili Edwin Thanarajah from the University Hospital Frankfurt and the MPI for Metabolism Research Cologne, an associated partner of the German Center for Diabetes Research (DZD).

Sugary drinks such as cola or lemonade not only contain glucose and fructose, but also numerous additives – including preservatives and artificial sweeteners. This combination can disturb the delicate balance in the intestinal microbiome. Inflammation-promoting bacteria are favored, while the production of protective short-chain fatty acids decreases. Animal studies show that such changes can trigger inflammatory processes in the nervous system and thus increase depressive behavior. 

It is striking that this correlation appears to be sex-related. In men who regularly consumed soft drinks, the researchers found neither an increase in Eggerthella nor a correlation with depressive symptoms. It is still unclear why this effect only occurs in women. Hormonal differences or sex-related reactions of the immune system possibly play a role. 

The Microbiome as a Therapeutic Target? 

“The study results open up new perspectives for the prevention and treatment of depressive disorders,” comments DZD researcher Rachel Lippert from the German Institute of Human Nutrition Potsdam-Rehbrücke (DIfE). “Microbiome-based approaches – such as targeted nutritional therapies or probiotic strategies – might help to effectively alleviate depressive symptoms in the future.” 

The researchers therefore argue that the influence of nutrition on mental health should be more strongly integrated into educational campaigns, care concepts and prevention programs. 

“Changes in the microbiome can be influenced by diet – and are therefore a potential therapeutic target,” explains Edwin. “Even small adjustments in consumer behavior might have a big impact – especially when considering the widespread consumption of soft drinks.” 

 

Older adults can regain optimal well-being

Nearly one-quarter of older adults aged 60 or older, who initially reported poor well-being, had regained optimal well-being within three years, according to a study published September 24, 2025, in the open-access journal PLOS One by Mabel Ho and Esme Fuller-Thomson from the University of Toronto, Canada. The study highlights the potential value of an active and healthy lifestyle, including maintaining healthy body weight, not smoking, becoming physically active, tackling sleeping problems, and preventing and managing chronic diseases, as well as the value of fostering psychological, emotional and social wellness.

There is a burgeoning interest in understanding the factors associated with resilience and lifelong flourishing. Many modifiable lifestyle factors can preserve optimal well-being, which is defined as achieving a sense of physical, psychological and emotional, social, and self-rated well-being, regardless of chronic health conditions. However, relatively few studies have examined factors associated with regaining optimal well-being in later life after a period of struggling.

By analyzing data from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging, Ho and Fuller-Thomson examined the characteristics of 8,332 older adults who did not meet the criteria for optimal well-being at baseline, and assessed them again three years later, when they were at least 60 years old.

The authors found that nearly one-quarter of these individuals had regained optimal well-being over the three-year period. Respondents with baseline psychological and emotional wellness were most likely to regain optimal well-being: they were almost five times more likely to achieve optimal well-being by the end of the three-year period than were those who did not have psychological and emotional wellness at baseline.

The prevalence of regaining optimal well-being was also higher among respondents who, at baseline, were younger (under 70 years old), were married, and had incomes above the poverty line. In terms of health characteristics, being physically active, non-smoking, not having sleeping problems, and not having chronic conditions such as obesity, diabetes, arthritis, or osteoporosis, were all associated with increased odds of regaining optimal well-being.

Since all Canadian citizens and permanent residents have free access to medically necessary services, the study’s findings may not fully apply to settings where patients must pay for healthcare services and so may experience reduced access to this help. It is also unclear if the findings can be generalized to low- and middle-income countries.

If future research establishes that the associations observed in the current study are causal, policies and interventions that support physical, psychological, emotional, social, and self-rated wellness might help older adults to regain optimal well-being. For example, programs and services can be provided to encourage older adults to engage in an active and healthy lifestyle, to manage chronic conditions, and to prevent social isolation. According to the authors, these interventions might play an important role in enhancing older adults' resilience and enabling them to regain optimal well-being in later life.

“What’s powerful about this research is the reminder that later life can still be fulfilling, even after difficult periods. Good health is important, but so are the people, meaning, and joy we have in our lives,” says first author Mabel Ho, a recent doctoral graduate at the University of Toronto’s Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work (FIFSW) and the Institute of Life Course and Aging.

“This is a clear call to invest in prevention, financial stability, and accessible wellness supports—because these aren’t just smart policies, they can potentially improve the trajectory of aging for older adults who are struggling," says senior author Esme Fuller-Thomson, Director of the Institute for Life Course & Aging and Professor at the University of Toronto’s Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work. 

 

 

In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available article in PLOS One: http://plos.io/3HUvmqZ 

Drinking any amount of alcohol likely increases dementia risk

 Drinking any amount of alcohol likely increases the risk of dementia, suggests the largest combined observational and genetic study to date, published online in BMJ Evidence Based Medicine.

Even light drinking—generally thought to be protective, based on observational studies—is unlikely to lower the risk, which rises in tandem with the quantity of alcohol consumed, the research indicates.

Current thinking suggests that there might be an ‘optimal dose’ of alcohol for brain health, but most of these studies have focused on older people and/or didn’t differentiate between former and lifelong non-drinkers, complicating efforts to infer causality, note the researchers.

To try and circumnavigate these issues and strengthen the evidence base, the researchers drew on observational data and genetic methods (Mendelian randomisation) from two large biological databanks for the entire ‘dose’ range of alcohol consumption.

These were the US Million Veteran Program (MVP), which includes people of European, African, and Latin American ancestry, and the UK Biobank (UKB), which includes people of predominantly European ancestry.

Participants who were aged 56–72 at baseline, were monitored from recruitment until their first dementia diagnosis, death, or the date of last follow-up (December 2019 for MVP and January 2022 for UKB), whichever came first. The average monitoring period was 4 years for the US group, and 12 for the UK group. 

Alcohol consumption was derived from questionnaire responses—over 90% of participants said they drank alcohol—and the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT-C) clinical screening tool. This screens for hazardous drinking patterns, including the frequency of binge drinking (6 or more drinks at a time).

In all, 559,559 participants from both groups were included in observational analyses, 14,540 of whom developed dementia of any type during the monitoring period:10,564 in the US group; and 3976 in the UK group. And 48,034 died: 28,738 in the US group and 19,296 in the UK group. 

Observational analyses revealed U-shaped associations between alcohol and dementia risk: compared with light drinkers (fewer than 7 drinks a week) a 41% higher risk was observed among non-drinkers and heavy drinkers consuming 40 or more drinks a week, rising to a 51% higher risk among those who were alcohol dependent. 

Mendelian randomisation genetic analyses drew on key data from multiple large individual genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of dementia, involving a total of 2.4 million participants to ascertain lifetime (rather than current) genetically predicted risks.

Mendelian randomisation leverages genetic data, minimising the impact of other potentially influential factors, to estimate causal effects: genomic risk for a trait (in this case, alcohol consumption) essentially stands in for the trait itself. 

Three genetic measures related to alcohol use were used as different exposures, to study the impact on dementia risk of alcohol quantity, as well as problematic and dependent drinking. 

These exposures were: self-reported weekly drinks (641 independent genetic variants);  problematic ‘risky’ drinking (80 genetic variants); and alcohol dependency (66 genetic variants). 

Higher genetic risk for all 3 exposure levels was associated with an increased risk of dementia, with a linear increase in dementia risk the higher the alcohol consumption. 

For example, an extra 1-3 drinks a week was associated with a 15% higher risk. And a doubling in the genetic risk of alcohol dependency was associated with a 16% increase in dementia risk.

But no U-shaped association was found between alcohol intake and dementia, and no protective effects of low levels of alcohol intake were observed. Instead, dementia risk steadily increased with more genetically predicted drinking. 

What’s more, those who went on to develop dementia typically drank less over time in the years preceding their diagnosis, suggesting that reverse causation—whereby early cognitive decline leads to reduced alcohol consumption—underlies the supposed protective effects of alcohol found in previous observational studies, say the researchers.

They acknowledge that a principal limitation of their findings is that the strongest statistical associations were found in people of European ancestry, because of the numbers of participants of this ethnic heritage studied. Mendelian randomisation also relies on assumptions that can’t be verified, they add.

Nevertheless, they suggest that their findings “challenge the notion that low levels of alcohol are neuroprotective.”

And they conclude: “Our study findings support a detrimental effect of all types of alcohol consumption on dementia risk, with no evidence supporting the previously suggested protective effect of moderate drinking. 

“The pattern of reduced alcohol use before dementia diagnosis observed in our study underscores the complexity of inferring causality from observational data, especially in ageing populations. 

BMJ Group retracts trial on apple cider vinegar and weight loss

 BMJ Group has retracted research suggesting that small daily quantities of apple cider vinegar might help people who are overweight or obese to lose weight.

The small clinical trial was published in the open access journal BMJ Nutrition, Prevention & Health in March 2024 and its findings press released. The study findings generated widespread international attention at the time, and continue to be frequently referred to in media coverage.

The retraction was prompted by concerns raised about the quality of the work, including the approach to statistical analysis of the data; implausible statistical values; the reliability of the raw data; inadequate reporting of methods; and lack of prospective trial registration, which breaches BMJ Group’s editorial policy.

Initially, concerns were raised in critiques of the study, some of which were published as letters in the journal. But after review by BMJ Group’s content integrity team, the study was referred to statistical experts to evaluate its reliability.  This included attempts to replicate the results and examine the authenticity of the underlying data supplied by the authors. 

It wasn’t possible for the statisticians to replicate the results and multiple analytical errors were identified. There were also irregularities in the data set, and their report, which is appended to the retraction notice, concluded that the data collected from each participant would require further independent scrutiny. 

The authors said that the identified errors were honest mistakes, but they agree with the decision to retract the study.

Dr Helen Macdonald, Publication Ethics and Content Integrity Editor at BMJ Group, said: “Tempting though it is to alert readers to an ostensibly simple and apparently helpful weight loss aid, at present the results of the study are unreliable, and journalists and others should no longer reference or use the results of this study in any future reporting.”

She added: “This retraction reflects our strategic and proactive approach to investigating concerns raised about the content we publish. We act where necessary in the interests of openness and the importance of correcting the scientific record.

“While we deal with allegations as swiftly as possible, it’s very important that due process is followed. Investigations are often complex. This one involved detailed scrutiny of data and correspondence with researchers, institutions, and other experts, for example. Reaching a sound and fair and final decision can therefore take several months.”

Commenting on the decision to publish the study despite the lack of trial registration, Professor Martin Kohlmeier, editor in chief of BMJ Nutrition Prevention & Health, explained: “In hindsight, this was the wrong decision to make. But the authors come from a scientific environment that is underrepresented in nutritional research and the journal aims to prioritise high quality evidence, which usually comes from clinical trials. 

“These are relatively unusual in nutritional research as they can be challenging to undertake because of the numbers of participants and time needed to obtain meaningful results.”

Wrist cooling represents a promising approach for managing hot flashes

 Hot flashes which are sudden, temporary intense sensations of body warmth, often accompanied by flushing and sweating during the day and night (night sweats) are referred to as vasomotor symptoms (VMS). These VMS are associated with sleep disturbances, cognitive dysfunction, severe fatigue, increased pain severity and decreased quality of life. Hot flashes affect up to 80% of women going through the menopause transition, 80% of men with prostate cancer undergoing or after completion of androgen deprivation therapy and 50-80% of breast cancer patients receiving hormone deprivation therapy.

 

The consequences of VMS experienced by perimenopausal and postmenopausal women, aging men and breast and prostate cancer patients cannot be overstated. These overwhelming devastating symptoms not only have a significant impact on the quality-of-life, affect decision-making for life preserving hormone deprivation therapy for breast cancer and prostate cancer patients but also have significant economic and societal consequences.

 

A new study from Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine has shown that a wristband cooling device significantly reduced severe hot flash episodes among breast cancer, prostate cancer and postmenopausal women.

 

“Most non-hormonal pharmaceutical options for managing hot flashes are limited by significant side effects.and hormone replacement therapy is not  appropriate for breast and prostate cancer patients who were on, or who have been treated with, hormone deprivation therapy. This creates an urgent need for safe, effective, non-pharmaceutical interventions suitable for diverse patient populations experiencing debilitating VMS,” explains corresponding author Michael F. Holick, PhD, MD, professor of medicine, pharmacology, physiology & biophysics and molecular medicine at the school.

 

Twenty-seven participants (10 breast cancer, 12 prostate cancer, five postmenopausal women) experiencing at least two moderate-to-severe daily hot flashes were enrolled in a randomized, double-blind study to receive either the active wrist cooling device or an identical, non-cooling wrist band. After two weeks of baseline recordings, participants used their assigned device for two weeks, then crossed over to the alternative device for an additional two additional weeks. Their hot flash frequency and severity were recorded in personal diaries throughout the testing.

 

The researchers observed a 46% reduction in severe hot flash episodes. Subset analysis revealed a 41% reduction in severe episodes in breast cancer patients and 50% reduction in severe episodes in prostate cancer patients and postmenopausal women. It also reduced the number of daily hot flashes by 18%.

 

According to the researchers, the wrist with its high neurological sensitivity has been identified as an effective site for targeted cooling therapy and for the development of devices to treat and/or improve such conditions as motion sickness, Parkinson’s disease, Tourette’s syndrome and hand tremors. Holick believes that the wrist cooling device signals the body’s hypothalamus, through the cooling neuron signaling pathway, that the body is experiencing intense cooling. That shuts down the overheating signals for initiating and controlling vasodilation and sweating thereby mitigating the impending vasomotor response (hot flash).

 

These findings appear online in the journal Endocrinology and Diabetes. W

Mammograms may benefit women well into their 80s

For many older women, the question of whether to continue breast cancer screening has been uncertain. While most guidelines recommend mammograms up to age 74, advice for women 75 and older has been less clear. Now, a new study from researchers at the UCLA Health Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center suggests that regular mammograms may still offer significant benefits for women in their 80s.

The study, published in the Annals of Surgical Oncology, found that women in their 80s who get regular mammograms are more likely to have breast cancer detected early, need less aggressive treatment and live longer.

“When cancer is found on screening, it is often early stage,” said Dr. Nimmi Kapoor, an associate professor of surgery at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and senior author of the study. “In postmenopausal women with the most common hormone-sensitive breast cancers, we can often omit sentinel lymph node biopsy, chemotherapy, and sometimes even radiation. Screening is especially important in this era of de-escalation because early detection allows us to safely reduce the intensity of treatment while still achieving excellent outcomes.”

The number of older adults in the U.S. has grown rapidly over the past decade, and age is a major risk factor for breast cancer. As a result, determining the most effective way to screen older women has become increasingly important, the researchers noted. Yet guidance is limited, leaving many women and their doctors uncertain about when to continue or stop routine mammograms. Screening in older women also raises concerns about overdiagnosis, when cancers are detected that may never cause problems, and the associated costs. 

With limited data on the benefits of mammography for women over 80, the researchers set out to compare outcomes between those who continued regular screening and those who did not.

The team analyzed medical records of 174 women aged 80 and older who were diagnosed with breast cancer at UCLA between 2013 and 2020. Most cancers were estrogen receptor–positive and HER2-negative and were mostly stage 1 or 2. Patients were divided into two groups: Those who had a mammogram within two years before their diagnosis (98 women) and those who did not (76 women). They then compared outcomes —including cancer stage at diagnosis, treatment intensity, and overall survival— between the two groups.

They found that women who did not have regular mammograms were more likely to have tumors that were advanced, high-grade or noticeable by touch. Screened women were more likely to have surgery to remove the tumor, while unscreened women sometimes omitted surgery altogether.

After a median follow-up of 55 months, they found women who were screened had a 55% lower risk of their cancer returning and a 74% lower risk of dying compared with women who were not screened. These advantages remained even after accounting for age, tumor type, and whether they had surgery.

"We were surprised to see such a significant survival difference among these women in their 80s," said Kapoor, who is also an investigator in the UCLA Health Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center. "Our findings underscore the importance of encouraging breast cancer screening in elderly patients, regardless of age, unless they have more pressing health issues. Current guidelines are vague and often left to the provider’s discretion, so studies like ours help provide much-needed data for this underrepresented population."

While the findings are encouraging, the researchers noted some limitations. The study looked back at medical records and only included women who were ultimately diagnosed with breast cancer, so it doesn’t capture potential downsides of screening, such as false positives, extra tests, or the emotional and financial stress on patients and their families. Larger studies are needed to confirm the benefits of mammograms for older women and to guide clearer screening recommendations.