E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSMen who drink sugar-sweetened beverages, including sodas and non-carbonated fruit drinks, may have a higher risk of heart attack, a new study shows.
Harvard researchers found that men who drank one sugar-sweetened beverage per day had a 20 percent increased risk of heart attack compared to those who eschewed the sugary drinks, according to the study published in the journal Circulation.
And the risk rose with increasing consumption: Two sugary drinks a day was linked to a 42 percent increase in risk, while three was associated with a 69 percent increase.
The researchers also found that sugary drinks were associated with higher levels of inflammatory factors, such as CRP, that are thought to be involved in the development of heart disease.
The bottom line is that Americans need to pay more attention to what they’re drinking, said the study’s lead author, Lawrence de Koning, a research fellow in the department of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health. “The first thing to do is to reduce the intake of sodas and then eventually eliminate them,” de Koning said.
Related story: 5 great reasons to kick the soda habit
The new research found no connection between artificially sweetened drinks -- in other words, diet sodas -- and heart disease risk. “But there are probably better choices, such as water, coffee and tea,” de Koning said. Besides, another recently published study did indeed find a link between a daily diet soda and heightened heart attack risks.
This study adds to the accumulating evidence that sugary beverages hurt your health, said Dr. Y. Claire Wang, an assistant professor of health policy and management at the Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University.
The new report looked at data gathered as part of the Health Professionals Follow-up study, which has been gathering information on 42,883 men for the last 22 years. During that time there were 3,683 heart attacks in the men, some fatal and some not. And although this data set focused solely on men, past research has linked women's soda habits with heart disease, too.
When de Koning and his colleagues looked at sugar-sweetened beverages, they found a strong correlation between sugary drinks and heart attack risk. And that link stayed strong even after the researchers accounted for factors such as smoking, physical activity, alcohol intake, vitamin use, family history and BMI.
And while link doesn’t absolutely prove that sugary drinks increase the risk of heart disease, there is evidence from other studies showing that these beverages have an impact on risk factors, de Koning said. In one study, for example, volunteers who decreased sugary soda consumption experienced a reduction in blood pressure levels, he added.
“At the end of the day,” Wang said, “the best thing to drink is still water.
Related:
Leave a Comment:
But this other story on MSNBC says:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46431225/ns/health-diet_and_nutrition/#.T15e6XmnnIY
And if you drink too much water you can also die.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2014112/Drinking-water-bad-health-Benefits-myth.html
Anyone knows that the trajection of the hypotnus in correlation to the suppository molaculer resonance of a liquid in motion , benifits from the fructose conglomorate introduction of a state of matter in suspension. There fore I suggest that the mammmory conclusion is wholly irreverant to the substance in farenheit form of a liquid! I rest my case!
just more obamascare bs!
"waaah, waaah, waaah."
i aint never, and never will be drinking those diet sodas or litebeers, or any of those fancy dressings other than ranch. americans are so wimpy. me, me, me, fee,l feel, feel. im gonna eat and drink what i want when i want okay? is that okay with all you libs? im so tired of this administrations insistance on my health. this is just another example of liberal media bias. whats next guys?
@texmann,
Only imbeciles attribute every little thing to a president...any president.
imbilciles? were you trying to say liberals? ha ha i am not a liberal celticsun trust me. im actually an american. you know, that country where we dont blow eachother up with car bombs all the time and riot at soccer games!! REAL football ya know?
next time do a little research before you open your big mouth!
@ texmann, you are an idiot. No-one is forcing you do to drink anything, eat anything you don't want. This wasn't done by any governmental agency. This was done at Harvard, one of the most respected institutions worldwide.
This has NOTHING to do with ANY health care bill. FYI a-hole, its NOT Obamacare.
Typical Texa$$ thinking they know best. They love to shoot their mouths off without reading, since most Texans can't educate themselves without consulting the bible first.
Healthcare doesn't belong to a Liberal or a Conservative. Being healthy is a Human right. I don't see Democrats trying to limit your rights, only the Republicants! Hell, President Obama gave gun owners the right for the first time in America's history the right to carry weapons into a National Park. NO president ever has before him, and you gun toting panty wastes claimed he wanted to strip away your gun rights. LIARS
Texmann, learn something before you spout off. Cuz clearly you can't read!
Texmann, your right about one thing, we don't blow each other up at games, we just beat each other up in the parking lot, LA Dogers vs San Fran in LA 2011 (fan got beat up and almost died at the hands of Dodgers fans) Josh Hamilton indirectly killed a man at Rangers game 2011 by tossing a ball into the stands. 2 morons probably drunk conservatives at a White Sox game jumped the field and beat up an umpire years ago.
have also read articles from this same group that said the artificial sweeteners in "Diet Sodas" cause Cancer. The Chlorine in Drinking Water can also cause health related illnesses. Drinking Soda is no more dangerous than drinking chemical laced water, diet soda, regular soda or anything else. You can also become "intoxicated" if you drink a lot of water. These types of studies are jokes, created by highly paid individuals to justify their continued existence while being paid huge salaries at the taxpayer’s expense. The Feds. Supplement or fully pay for these useless studies with tax dollars, when anything taken in excess can cause health issues. I see a new Government Regulation in the making and an effort to tax sodas so the Government can continue to erode our right to choose what we eat & drink.
I think the idea is to be informed about what you are drinking and it's potential health risks. If you know sugary sodas can cause heart disease and you are already at hightened risk, you might consider reducing your intake. And the chemicals in diet sodas probably do cause cancer, so if you are really concered about that, don't drink them. Water really is healthy, hydrating and cleansing. Once you start drinking it regularly, you crave it just like when you are additcted to sodas. If you know your tap water is chlorinated, buy a filter or have sparklettes delivered. And you really have to drink a lot of water to become "intoxicated".
Thank goodness this study applies only to sugar-sweetened beverages. All the sodas I drink are sweetened with corn syrup. The big-government liberal types would have us all drinking water (though the plastic bottles will probably be banned eventually), coffee and tea (unsweetened and decaffeinated, of course). No thanks. Keep your hands off my guns and my sodas.
BTW, I'm a 5'10" guy weighing 150 lbs, who has been drinking sodas for over 50 years. I don't consider myself to be at greater risk of a heart attack than the average person my age, no matter what the study says.
Watch PBS.org Frontline "Poisoned Waters" and then tell me water is better. City water is probably in the soda too but they need to rerun the data set by city and see what the rates of each malady are. I will soon have a Reverse Osmosis system. I already have carbon water filters. If you have a well and live anywhere near a fracking gas well, you may have a worse problem with the water.
DUH
And if you live you will also die
Here is the recipe for Splenda:
Carbon Monoxide + Chlorine = Phosgene
Sugar + Phosgene = Splenda
Isn't that yummy? Phosgene is the military gas used in WWII and the same gas which killed 2,300 people at the Union Carbide plant in 1984. The only plant in the US that makes Splenda has the sign "Organ Damage" on every tanks.
So what?
Sodium and chloride are both poisonous and if you combine them you get table salt. I'm not saying that this study has no validity, but I am saying chemistry is a strange science and the formula doesn't mean all that much.
exactly. bombs are made from hydrogen, yet water is 2/3rds hydrogen.
sucralose (splenda) was and still is studied extensively to be safe. while sucrose (cane sugar) has been studied and constantly shown to be extremely toxic. there was a study done which showed 80grams of cane sugar (a candy bar or poptart), was more toxic on the organs than 1 shot of 80 proof alcohol. yet people give their children cane sugar like theres no tomorrow.
False. Before you go around touting "alleged" reports or accusations as truth, you might want to do some checking. Sucralose is indeed made by fusing chlorine atoms. We ingest chlorine on a daily basis through salt (as was mentioned). Phosgene, however, is NOT in the product, and was merely used by the sugar companies to discredit their biggest competitors.
Now I'm not saying that splenda is good or healthy in the long run (sugar certainly isn't), but don't spread false claims by other companies and instead back your claims with scientific evidence and true reports.
Time out on the Sucralose nonsense folks. This is called a space alien molecule, and for good reason. It does not exist in nature. What we are today is the result of millions of year's of evolution, and it appears we have never encountered this molecule. Our bodies are not made, and have never been made, to process this stuff.
It's bad enough that sugar tastes so good knowing that it beats the hell out of our pancreas and is a primary culprit in obesity. But Sucralose? That's some seriously bad stuff.
I eat sugar, and I love it, but as always, moderation is the key.
The recipe I laid out is science. I simply outlined how the product is made. Whether it is safe to eat or not is up the consumer. I worked at the McIntosh plant where they make the stuff and would never eat it myself.
BREAKING NEWS...
Being alive inevitably leads to death. No cure found!
Are we talking about sugar from cane and sugar beets or are we talking about high fructose corn syrup? If no distinction was made about sugar source, then the study is worthless. Much like most research performed by the mega institutions, sounds good, but no real substance!
There's very little difference between cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup.
Dave, where did you get your chemistry degree? "There's very lttle difference......". There is very little difference between an aircraft carrier and a row boat, cause they both float! We don't do "very little difference" in MY research. There is alot of round about research going on, in this country, and we all suffer for it!
MrKnow is spot on. I know that High Fructose Korn Syrup is not good for you at all because of its very nature. Too much natural sugar - probably not either. But there is a big difference. The article needs to explain further. Most people who are drinking a couple sodas a day are most likely getting the HFCS and not sucrose.
Your birth certificate has an expiration date.
Why now. We have been drinking soda for as long as I can remember. Its not the soda, its the food associated with soda. If everyone would just exercise everyday for 30 minutes the would control their weight, improve heart health, flexibility, and up their immune system that will protect them from health hazards associated by soda.
I am always impressed by the flexibility of the female body, adding intelligence to the mix is even better.
Women are like shrimp.
Keep the body toss the head.
Is this the same group that published the stupid study saying ALL red meat leads to death?
I find this study on Soda just as bogus as that one on Red meat
And thats my opinion.
I hope this does not include beer or wine.
III thnk imm'm drinkkking toooo muccch coffeeeee.
It has been said before that being alive causes death and there is no cure. But I would say there is a cure, if life causes death then death prevents life which means you will never die.
I've been smoking for over 50 years, and drinking Coke for breakfast, lunch and dinner (about 6 a day) almost as long. I've burried my brother and most of my friends who drank Coke, quit or never smoked and ate a "normal" diet (my main staple is pizza). It's all a crock.
Same here Ed. I lived with a Big Slam Pepsi in my hand all day. I pry drank 5 or more a day. Now I have gotten off of colas and switched to 7 Up and Sprite. The only thing that I noticed was a better full nights sleep. I also eat out alot due to working on the road most of the time. However, I am 41 years old and never had a cavity, no high blood pressure, my cholesterol tests showed no signs of problems, and I very rarely get colds. I still drink large amounts of soda but I don't drink alcohol, nor do I use tobacco. This test is a crock.
My Uncle Willis drinks 9 to 12 cans of soda a day and he is 172 years old......I might add that Uncle Willis is a grey from the planet Poppalott.
Well, there you go, REALITY. EVERYONE knows that greys from the planet Poppalott live a adverage of 90 years longer then the greens, who eat mud.
Cheeseburger and a glass of water. Mmmmmmmm!
Thin crust pepperoni pizza and beer. Mmmmmmmm!
There is a post up above with a link to the Daily Mail that says Water is bad for you
All these studies, In my opinion, are Bogus
And this is indeed my opinion.
There is such a thing as water intoxication. You can mess up your bodies chemistry if you drink too much water too fast.
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Water+poisoning
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1770067/
http://www.randomscience.com/Water-Poisoning.php
I think the Article said Water is bad, not how much you drank but that it is bad for you.
According to medical studies, everything is BAD for you. Who cares.
Reminds me of a multipane cartoon I saw in the late 70's of all the things that caused death. The last panel was of sex not causing death and the cartoon character had a big grin. 2-3 years latter AIDS hit the scene and now it seems that nothing is truly safe.
2 drinks = 42% 3 drinks =69% Does that mean that if I drink 5 cans of soda a day I can guarantee I die of a heart attack? What about 10? Does that mean I'm already dead but my brain hasn't figured it out yet?
No it is increased risk.
So if you have .000000000004 chance.. and you drink two pops you now have .000000000008 chance
Nothing to see here.. only the sky is falling. We are talking fractions of a billion of a percent. Your DNA impacts your chance of heart issues by a few million times more than your sugar input.
And I'll bet a person who has one sugary drink every other day has around a 10% increase. The people in this study are all being compared to people who NEVER have sugary drinks, not the average person. This study is flawed. It says nothing about the health effects of sugary beverages, only that people who avoid them, (health-nuts who probably avoid a lot of unhealthy things) are more healthy.
Hurry! Someone send a few cases over to Rush!
The hypothesis claimed in this research is bogus, because it does not distinguish between sucrose (pure cane sugar, beet sugar), glucose (a.k.a., dextrose, where corn syrup is an example), fructose, and high-fructose corn syrup, as well as honey, where the most prevalent sweetener at the dawn of the early-21st century is high-fructose corn syrup, followed by corn syrup and fructose depending on the type of soft drink, and whether it has added sweetener, where for example unsweetened fruit juices like apple juice and pear juice are sweetened naturally with fructose, although unsweetened grape juice is sweetened naturally with glucose, where yet another name for glucose is "grape sugar" . . .
[NOTE: At this point, the "Common Sense Alert™" bell should be ringing loudly, because this patently goofy research is suggesting that men who drink one glass of organic apple juice or organic grape juice are at a higher risk for heart attacks, where one glass of organic apple juice or organic grape juice is equivalent to perhaps three apples or a bunch of grapes, and in the grand scheme of everything how stupid does one need to be to fail to make the simple inference. In other words, if you think this research is credible and you are a man, then the research is telling you (a) to stop drinking fresh-squeezed Florida orange juice, organic apple juice, organic grape juice, and fresh coconut juice and (b) to stop eating fruit, including apples, grapes, raisins, apricots, plums, prunes, peaches, melons, bananas, figs, and lots of other stuff, including sugar cane and using honey as a sweetener, which is just plain STUPID . . . ]
The fact is that high-fructose corn syrup was introduced in the US on a large scale beginning in the early-1980s, and over the years finding soft drinks sweetened with pure cane sugar or beet sugar in the US has become increasingly difficult to the point that today there are only a handful of soft drinks which are sweetened with sucrose (a.k.a., sugar) in the US, and in the soda pop section of most stores the only national brands are Pepsi Throwback, Mountain Dew Throwback, and Sierra Mist, since everything else is sweetened with Frankensweeteners, although there are organic brands that are sweetened with raw sugar, sugar cane juice, and other tasty stuff . . .
If the hypothesis were that all it takes is one soft drink sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup per day to increase the risk for heart attack in men, then this might work as a plausible result of the research, but without the qualification which makes the hypothesis specific to high-fructose corn syrup, it is just a patently bogus glittering generality which truly makes no sense . . .
Yet another fact is that with a few rare exceptions caused by congenital errors in basic genetic algorithms, the human body has deep and rich ancestral knowledge regarding how to process glucose, fructose, and sucrose, and in fact is designed specifically to be able to process glucose, fructose, and sucrose, which is not the case with Frankensweeteners, because two additional facts are (a) that high-fructose corn syrup did not exist on this planet until sometime in the late-1950s when it was concocted in a research laboratory in the US and (b) that it was only in the late-1970s after demented Japanese chemists devised a way to manufacture high-fructose corn syrup in huge quantities using high temperature enzymatic processes that there was any significant amount of high-fructose corn syrup on this planet, all of which maps to the basic problem, which is that the human body considers high-fructose corn syrup to be a toxin or poison, hence sends a significant percentage of it to the liver for detoxification, and for the most part the liver has no idea what to do with it either, really . . .
Really! :-o
Birth is the number one cause of death.
Is it any sugar, or just sodas?
"New Government study finds ,we all die " ...
In related news, dead Democrat voters still able to vote.
Next you'll tell me masturbation will make you go blind!!
Just a few years ago the FDA did a study on negative health implications of infants from breast feeding and were ready to ban it. They didn't because no one could decide where to put the warning labels.
Birth is the number one cause of death.
I am going to apply for a government research grant to study this.
I bet I get the grant.
You have to be more unethical to get the real money.
A documentary and some books promoting your scam...er, I mean "serious issue" will do nice. Get the mainstream media to promote your issue and call those who oppose it on the take for "big business".
It is a solid tactic that is used over and over again every year to enrich people who would otherwise be occupying a cardboard box under a bridge.