Medical Bulletin 11/August/2026 - Video

Here are the top medical news for today:

New Study Challenges Decades-Old Advice to Choose Low-Fat Dairy Products

Your morning glass of full-fat milk may not be the dietary villain it was once made out to be.

A new Canadian study is challenging decades of low-fat advice, finding that three servings of full-fat dairy a day did not worsen body weight, body composition, cholesterol, or energy metabolism—and may even provide some health benefits.

Published in The Journal of Nutrition, the 12-week study included 74 adults with overweight or obesity. Participants were randomly assigned to different dietary approaches, including a calorie-restricted low-dairy diet, an energy-neutral diet containing three daily dairy servings, or an unrestricted diet with three servings of dairy.

After 12 weeks, researchers found no meaningful differences in weight gain, body composition, or blood lipid levels between participants eating three servings of dairy and those following the low-dairy approach. Importantly, the higher-dairy groups did not develop harmful cholesterol levels or signs of insulin resistance.

There was also a nutritional upside. Participants consuming more dairy showed improvements in blood pressure and consumed greater amounts of calcium, protein, and vitamin D.

Why might full-fat dairy behave differently from what its saturated-fat content suggests? Researchers point to the “dairy matrix” hypothesis. Dairy is not simply a collection of individual nutrients; proteins, fats, minerals, and other components are structurally packaged together. This matrix may influence how nutrients are digested and absorbed, potentially changing their effects on health.

The findings could be particularly relevant for older adults, who often need nutrient-rich foods such as protein and calcium while managing lower energy requirements.

However, the study was relatively small and lasted only 12 weeks, so it cannot settle the long-term cardiovascular question. For now, the researchers suggest focusing less on demonizing individual nutrients and more on overall dietary patterns.

In other words: eat a variety of foods, keep portions sensible—and perhaps stop treating full-fat dairy like the enemy.

REFERENCE: Gerald Harvey Anderson, et al.; The Effect of Three Daily Servings of Full-Fat Dairy for 12 Weeks on Body Weight, Body Composition, Energy Metabolism, Blood Lipids, and Dietary Intake of Adults with Overweight and Obesity. The Journal of Nutrition, 2026; 156 (4): 101373 DOI: 10.1016/j.tjnut.2026.101373

Researchers Highlight Pulses' Growing Role in Healthy, Sustainable Eating

Move over, fancy superfoods—your humble dal may be doing some serious heavy lifting.

A new review suggests that pulses such as beans, chickpeas, peas, lentils and lupin could play an important role in building healthier, more sustainable diets. Published in Nutrients, the narrative review examined evidence from the past decade on how pulses may benefit nutrition, gut health and metabolic health while generally carrying a lower environmental footprint than animal-based protein foods.

Pulses are nutritional powerhouses, providing around 17–30% protein, 10–20% dietary fiber, complex carbohydrates, vitamins, minerals and plant compounds with potential antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.

Their fiber and oligosaccharides can also feed beneficial gut bacteria, potentially increasing production of short-chain fatty acids such as butyrate and propionate. These compounds may support the gut barrier and influence immune and metabolic function.

Interestingly, pulses contain compounds traditionally labeled “antinutrients,” including phytates and tannins. While these can reduce mineral absorption, researchers note that they may also have antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects. Traditional preparation methods such as soaking, germination, cooking and fermentation can further improve digestibility and alter these compounds.

The review also found that higher pulse consumption has been associated with improvements in some cardiometabolic markers, including blood glucose and cholesterol, although results vary depending on the pulse, dose, preparation and population studied.

The gut connection may be especially important. Whole pulses retain their natural food matrix, allowing fermentable carbohydrates to reach the colon and potentially support sustained microbial activity. However, direct human evidence linking these changes to improved health remains limited.

Despite their benefits, pulse consumption remains relatively low in Europe, where cultural habits and the popularity of highly processed plant-based alternatives may be barriers.

The researchers stress that much of the evidence remains preliminary or preclinical.

REFERENCE: Lazarte, C. E., Rane, R., Hallenius, F., et al. (2026). Transitioning Towards Sustainable Diets: Pulses, Their Role in Modulating Gut Microbiota and Metabolic Health. Nutrients. DOI: 10.3390/nu18152571

Cutting Sweet Foods May Not Reduce Cravings or Improve Health: Study

Think cutting sweets will kill your sweet tooth? Your taste buds may not be taking notes.

A new six-month trial suggests that simply eating fewer sweet-tasting foods may not reduce people’s love of sweetness—or improve several health markers linked to diabetes and heart disease.

Published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, the study was conducted by researchers from Wageningen University and Research in the Netherlands and Bournemouth University in the UK. The team followed 180 participants, dividing them into three groups based on the amount of sweet-tasting food in their diets: high, low, or average.

The sweetness came from different sources, including sugar, naturally sweet foods and low-calorie sweeteners. That distinction is important because sweetness does not automatically mean poor nutrition. Fresh fruit, for example, tastes sweet while also providing fiber, vitamins and other beneficial nutrients.

Participants were assessed after one, three and six months. Researchers measured their liking and perception of sweetness, while also tracking body weight and collecting blood and urine samples to assess markers related to metabolic and cardiovascular health.

After six months, researchers found no significant differences between the three groups. People eating more sweet-tasting foods did not appear to develop a stronger preference for sweetness, while those consuming fewer sweet foods did not lose their sweet tooth.

Participants also tended to return to their previous levels of sweet-food consumption after the trial ended.

The researchers argue that public health advice should therefore distinguish between sweetness and sugar. A food can taste sweet because of sugar, natural ingredients or low-calorie sweeteners, while some foods that are not particularly sweet may still contain substantial amounts of sugar.

Instead of broadly telling people to avoid sweet-tasting foods, the researchers suggest focusing on added sugar and energy-dense foods, particularly highly processed products rich in sugar, fat or both.

The takeaway? You may not need to fear sweetness itself—but the nutritional package hiding behind it deserves a closer look.

REFERENCE: Eva M Čad, Monica Mars, et al.; The Sweet Tooth Trial: A Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial Investigating the Effects of A 6-Month Low, Regular, or High Dietary Sweet Taste Exposure on Sweet Taste Liking, and Various Outcomes Related to Food Intake and Weight Status. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2026; 123 (1): 101073 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajcnut.2025.09.041