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.

Phantom Hackers use tech tricks, fake banks, and government ploys

• The Phantom Hacker Scam has stolen over $1 billion since 2024, preying mostly on seniors retirement savings.

• Scammers use a three-step playbook fake tech support, phony bank checks, and government impersonations to gain access and drain accounts.

• Experts warn that AI is making more convincing, but awareness, family support, and quick action can help prevent or minimize losses.

Scammers arent just chasing quick cash anymore theyre going after entire life savings.

The FBI is warning about a fast-growing threat called the Phantom Hacker Scam, which has already drained more than $1 billion from victims, many of them seniors, since 2024.

To get the ins and outs of these , and help older consumers prepare themselves against potential harm, ConsumerAffairs spoke with cybersecurity expert Nati Tal, head of research at Guardio.

are quickly evolving, Tal said. Scammers are harnessing the power of AI to create fake retail sites, fake government notices, and even fake sponsored ads that look just like legitimate ads.

How it works

Tal breaks down how these typically occur:

The scam usually begins with a phishing email or fake pop-up notification from a company like Google, Microsoft, or Apple, she told ConsumerAffairs. It tells the victim that their device has been infected or that their account was suspended. If the victim calls the phone number in the email or pop-up, the scammer gets them to grant remote access to their computer, collects the victim's banking information, and pressures them to take action.

Once a victim calls the fake support scam phone, a well-designed and long-term customer acquisition begins, gently making the victim more and more convinced and manipulated to give more data, access to the computer and bank, and so on. They web filter victims according to their age, profession, residence, and more financial info if they manage to capture it first - just to make sure the rest of the scam is worth the trouble, making sure the revenue of this operation is optimized as much as possible.

Know the red flags

Tal broke down the biggest red flags of the Phantom Hacker :

• Pop-ups warning of a virus with a phone number to call

• Urgent requests to move money to a safe account

• Pressure to act immediately or keep the situation secret

• Requests for remote access to your device

• Communications claiming to be from multiple authorities (bank + government + tech company)

• If you see urgency, secrecy, and money movement in the same sentence - its almost always a scam.

Steering clear of these

Despite the sophistication of these , there are ways for consumers to protect themselves, their data, and their money.

Awareness is one of the best protections, Tal said. If people are aware of these , they're less likely to fall for them. Families should normalize discussing fraud attempts, sharing stories, and reminding each other that its important to pause and verify before acting.

Are you the subject of one of these ?

If you find yourself on the receiving end of one of these , Tal recommends the following:

• Stop contact with the scammer immediately.

• Contact your bank to freeze or flag suspicious activity.

• Run a full security scan on your device and remove any remote access software installed

• Change passwords and turn on 2FA on all affected accounts.

The faster someone reacts, the more likely they can limit the damage, he said.

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.