A viewer asks: “A recent study claimed that higher blood levels of the artificial sweetener erythritol were associated with increased risk of heart attack and stroke. Was this study manipulated to ruin the reputation of “a healthy alternative to sugar” or is this artificial sweetener produced through a fermentation process, actually harmful to humans when consumed in the dosages found in beverages and food? Is erythritol safer than Sucralose?”

We think erythritol is generally safe to use and is indeed safer than sucralose as a sweetening agent. We do not want to point fingers at anyone in particular. There are many ways clinical data becomes distorted to give false impressions. That is why there need to be replicated studies before drawing firm conclusions about clinical observations to begin with. There, indeed, is pressure given across-the-board by the interlopers to darken the interpretations given by opinion leaders, writers, and promoters of many kinds of adjuncts, including dietary, health maintenance, and technological adjuncts. So they are not only wanting to shape opinions in people's minds with respect to things like politics, religious beliefs, and many other ideological and cultural leanings, they will actively discourage things that are beneficial and promote things that will ultimately be a mixed blessing or will even backfire dramatically to bring harm, and that is the case here. There are pressures to slant opinions against safe practices as being unnecessary, or conversely, reject things less than perfect in some way as having problems of their own, when they might, in fact, be superior and thus reasonable to embrace given the limited options available.