Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundExcessive sugar consumption has paralleled the global rise in obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and related metabolic disorders. High-sugar diets directly contribute to weight gain, insulin resistance, and chronic hyperglycemia, which drive cardiovascular complications and systemic inflammation through advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and oxidative stress. Emerging evidence highlights their critical role in the pathogenesis of central nervous system (CNS) disorders, including Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and stroke, likely mediated through obesity-associated chronic inflammation, T2DM-driven blood-brain barrier dysfunction, and neuroinflammation.Rationale and aim of the studyThis review explores the impact of high-sugar diets on CNS diseases, focusing on the mechanisms involved, such as neuroinflammation, oxidative stress, insulin resistance, and altered neurotransmission. Methods: For this purpose, databases, such as PubMed, Medline, and PubMed Central (PMC) have been searched.ResultsAccumulating evidence underscores the detrimental impact of high-sugar diets, particularly those high in glucose and fructose, on CNS diseases. These dietary patterns are linked to the exacerbation of various CNS diseases through multiple pathways. After analyzing the current literature, we can develop targeted dietary interventions aimed at reducing the burden of CNS diseases associated with high-sugar diets.Discussion and conclusionThis paper emphasizes the importance of adopting nutritional approaches that address both metabolic and neurological health to combat the growing burden of CNS diseases linked to high-sugar consumption.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.