A large Brazilian study suggests high intake of certain sugar substitutes may speed up memory and thinking decline

• People who consumed the most artificial sweeteners experienced faster declines in memory and thinking skills.

• The effect was strongest in adults under 60 and in those with diabetes.

• The study found a link, but it does not prove that sweeteners directly cause cognitive decline.

Many of us reach for diet sodas, flavored waters, or low-calorie desserts believing theyre a healthier choice than sugary options.

However, a new study recently published in Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology, suggests some sugar substitutes might come with hidden risks particularly for brain health.

Researchers in Brazil followed more than 12,700 adults for nearly a decade to see how consumption of low- and no-calorie sweeteners might affect memory, language, and overall thinking abilities. They discovered that people who consumed the most sweeteners experienced faster declines in these skills, raising questions about the long-term effects of artificial sugar alternatives.

Low- and no-calorie sweeteners are often seen as a healthy alternative to sugar, however our findings suggest certain sweeteners may have negative effects on brain health over time, study author Claudia Kimie Suemoto, M.D., Ph.D., said in a news release.

The study

The study included adults with an average age of 52, who were tracked for about eight years. At the beginning, participants filled out detailed food and drink questionnaires, reporting what they consumed over the prior year.

Researchers looked specifically at seven common artificial sweeteners: aspartame, saccharin, acesulfame-K, erythritol, xylitol, sorbitol, and tagatose. These sweeteners are often found in diet drinks, energy drinks, yogurt, and low-calorie desserts.

Based on intake, participants were divided into three groups. The lowest group consumed around 20 milligrams of sweeteners per day, while the highest consumed about 191 milligrams daily the equivalent of roughly one can of diet soda for aspartame.

To measure changes over time, participants completed cognitive tests at the start, middle, and end of the study. These tests assessed memory, word recall, processing speed, and verbal fluency. Researchers then adjusted for other health factors such as age, sex, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease.

The findings

The researchers found that people who consumed the highest amounts of artificial sweeteners showed a decline in overall thinking and memory that was 62% faster than those who consumed the least. This was found to beequivalent to about 1.6 years of additional brain aging. Those in the middle group also saw declines, though less steep.

The link was most noticeable in adults under 60 and in those with diabetes, who are more likely to rely on sugar substitutes. Interestingly, one sweetener tagatose was not associated with cognitive decline.

While we found links to cognitive decline for middle-aged people both with and without diabetes, people with diabetes are more likely to use artificial sweeteners as sugar substitutes, Dr. Suemoto said. More research is needed to confirm our findings and to investigate if other refined sugar alternatives, such as applesauce, honey, maple syrup or coconut sugar, may be effective alternatives.

Pet food can infect humans as well as animals, health experts warn

• FDA says Darwins Natural Pet Products tested positive for E. coli and Salmonella

• Company refused to recall food despite confirmed human illness

• Experts warn pathogens in pet food can spread easily from pets to people

Case ties pet food to serious illness

When a young girl developed a life-threatening case of hemolytic uremic syndrome this past year, investigators traced the cause to her familys raw pet food. The E. coli O157:H7 infection was linked to Darwins Natural Pet Products, made by Arrow Reliance Inc., which tested positive for E. coli and Salmonella in July 2025.

The Food and Drug Administration urged the company to issue a recall, but Darwins refused. Instead, federal officials issued a safety alert, warning pet owners about the dangers. The case highlights how contaminated pet food can threaten not just animals, but also the people who handle or live with them.

Growing risks with raw diets

Raw pet diets have become popular with owners seeking natural options, but they are especially prone to bacterial contamination. FDA studies have found raw products are far more likely than processed kibble to contain dangerous pathogens such as Salmonella and Listeria monocytogenes.

Still, dry foods are not risk-free. Microbes can survive in processing facilities or arrive through tainted ingredients. Cross-contamination is a constant hazard, with bacteria spreading from food bowls to human kitchens or through pets that shed germs in saliva and feces.

Pet food has been identified as a source of pathogenic bacteria, including Salmonella and E. coli, a Purdue University study noted, adding that many owners remain unaware of the risks.

A year of recalls

The case tied to Darwins comes amid a string of high-profile recalls:

• Sept. 3, 2025: RAWR Raw Cat Food Chicken Eats Avian influenza (H5N1); one cat euthanized

• Aug. 25, 2025: Viva Raw LLC Ground beef and chicken Salmonella, Listeria

• July 29, 2025: Darwins Natural Pet Products Raw beef dog food E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella; one human illness

• July 11, 2025: Answers Pet Food Raw beef, pork, turkey Salmonella, Listeria

• April 11, 2025: Blue Ridge Beef Puppy Mix and Kitten Mix Salmonella, Listeria

• Dec. 27, 2024: Northwest Naturals Frozen Raw Cat Food Avian influenza (H5N1)

• Nov. 22, 2024: Mid America Pet Food Various products Salmonella

A review in Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety linked such outbreaks to contaminated raw materials and poor processing. Children, older adults and people with weakened immune systems are most at risk.

Safety precautions urged

Health officials say pet owners should treat pet food with the same care as raw meat. That means washing hands thoroughly, scrubbing bowls with hot soapy water, storing pet food separately from human food and staying alert to recalls.

They advise avoiding raw diets when possible, given the higher likelihood of contamination. Even dried meat chews have tested positive for harmful bacteria in some studies.

With more than 65 million U.S. households owning dogs and 46 million owning cats, the risks extend well beyond pets. What animals eat, experts warn, can have serious consequences for the entire family.

How to safely handle pet food

• Wash hands Scrub with warm, soapy water after handling pet food or treats.

• Clean bowls daily Use hot, soapy water or run them through the dishwasher.

• Separate storage Keep pet food away from human food in the fridge, freezer or pantry.

• Avoid raw diets Raw pet foods carry a much higher risk of Salmonella, E. coli and Listeria.

• Disinfect surfaces Wipe down counters, floors and toys that may contact pet saliva or food.

• Check recalls Stay updated on FDA alerts and brand recalls before feeding pets.

Tip: Treat pet food the same way youd handle raw meat in your kitchen.

Elderly residents losing tens of thousands of dollars, D.C. charges

• Suit alleges Athena Bitcoin charged hidden fees of up to 26% on scam deposits

• Nearly all BTM transactions in D.C. tied to fraud, with victims median age 71

• Officials say Athena ignored red flags and refused to refund elderly victims

District of Columbia Attorney General Brian L. Schwalb has filed suit against Athena Bitcoin, Inc., one of the nations largest operators of cryptocurrency ATMs, accusing the company of profiting from that have cost elderly residents tens of thousands of dollars. The lawsuit, announced Tuesday, alleges Athena imposed steep, undisclosed fees while failing to put in place safeguards against fraud.

Athena operates seven bitcoin ATMs, known as BTMs, in the District. The machines allow customers to purchase cryptocurrency with cash, but investigators say scammers often direct victims to send those funds straight to fraudsters digital wallets.

Data reveals staggering fraud rates

An investigation by Schwalbs office found that during Athenas first five months in D.C., 93% of all deposits were linked to and nearly half were flagged as fraudulent by victims themselves. The median victim was 71 years old and lost $8,000 per scam transaction. In one case, a resident lost $98,000 across 19 deposits in just a few days.

Athenas bitcoin machines have become a tool for criminals intent on exploiting elderly and vulnerable District residents, Schwalb said. Athena knows that its machines are being used primarily by scammers yet chooses to look the other way so that it can continue to pocket sizable hidden transaction fees.

Hidden fees and no refunds

According to the complaint, Athena charged users fees as high as 26% without disclosing them far above the typical 0.24% to 3% charged by mainstream exchanges. The company also allegedly refused to refund victims, even when notified of fraud, and required those seeking partial refunds to sign liability waivers freeing Athena from future claims.

Athenas approach, investigators said, effectively left elderly and vulnerable residents defenseless against international fraud schemes.

Seeking restitution and penalties

The lawsuit charges Athena with violating the Districts Consumer Protection Procedures Act and the Abuse, Neglect, and Financial Exploitation of Vulnerable Adults and the Elderly Act. Schwalbs office is seeking restitution for victims, civil penalties, and reforms to bring the company into compliance with District law.

The case is being handled by Assistant Attorneys General Anabel Butler and Jason Jones, Investigator Lu Lagravinese, and Civil Rights and Elder Justice Section Chief Alicia M. Lendon.

How seniors can spot common crypto

• Urgent demands for payment Scammers often pose as government agents, utility companies, or tech support and pressure victims to pay immediately using bitcoin ATMs.

• Instructions to deposit at a BTM Any request to buy cryptocurrency at an ATM and send it to a strangers digital wallet is a red flag.

• Unfamiliar contacts Calls, emails, or texts from unknown numbers directing you to transfer money are almost always fraudulent.

• Too-good-to-be-true offers Promises of guaranteed returns, sweepstakes winnings, or quick profits in crypto are a common hook.

• Refusal to provide details Scammers discourage victims from speaking with family, banks, or law enforcement.

Temu didn't provide the consumer protections required under a new rule, FTC says

By Truman Lewis of ConsumerAffairs

• FTC says Temu didnt give shoppers clear tools to report fake or unsafe goods.

• The company also failed to share basic details about many high-volume sellers.

• Temu must make changes and pay a $2 million penalty.

What happened

Temu, one of the fastest-growing online shopping apps, will pay $2 million to settle government claims that it broke the law designed to protect consumers from counterfeit, stolen, or unsafe products.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) says Temu violated the INFORM Consumers Act, which took effect in 2023. The law requires online marketplaces to give shoppers an easy way to report suspicious items and to clearly show whos selling the product.

What Temu did wrong

According to the FTC:

• Temu failed to offer a phone number that shoppers could use to report suspicious sellers.

• It didnt provide reporting tools in its gamified shopping experiences, such as spin-the-wheel coupons and in-app games, until late 2024.

• Even when reporting options were added, they werent clear or easy to find.

• In some cases, Temu didnt clearly disclose seller names, addresses, or contact details as required.

What changes are coming

As part of the settlement, Temu must:

• Give shoppers both electronic and phone-based ways to report problems, with simple instructions.

• Clearly display seller information, including names and contact details, across its app, website, and gamified shopping features.

• Pay a $2 million fine within a week of court approval.

Why it matters for shoppers

This is the first enforcement action under the INFORM Act, and the FTC says its meant to send a message to online marketplaces: follow the rules or face penalties.

If you shop on Temuor any other marketplaceyoull soon have clearer ways to report unsafe or suspicious items and to know more about who youre buying from.

You can also report concerns about online marketplaces directly to the FTC through its INFORM Act portal.