The author of this article reports on two French studies that suggest some commonly used food preservatives may be linked to a higher risk of certain cancers and type 2 diabetes. Using data from the NutriNet-Santé cohort, researchers examined detailed dietary records and health outcomes over many years. In the cancer analysis, several preservatives classified as generally recognized as safe were associated with higher risks of specific cancers, including sodium nitrite, potassium nitrate, sorbates, potassium metabisulfite, acetates, acetic acid, and some erythorbates. The strongest findings included higher risks of prostate cancer, breast cancer, and overall cancer among people with the highest exposures. The authors stressed that these are the first studies of their kind and that the findings should be interpreted cautiously until replicated.

The second study found that higher intake of multiple preservatives was associated with a substantially greater risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Five preservatives linked to cancer were also tied to diabetes risk. Several additional additives, including calcium propionate, alpha-tocopherol, sodium ascorbate, rosemary extracts, phosphoric acid, and citric acid, were also implicated. Experts quoted in the article said the findings do not prove causation, but they add to growing concern about the health effects of ultra-processed foods and support a broader emphasis on fresh, minimally processed foods. Overall, the article suggests these studies may prompt closer scientific scrutiny and possible regulatory reassessment of how widely certain food additives are used.

Reference: LaMotte S. Common food preservatives linked to cancer and type 2 diabetes. CNN. Published January 7, 2026. Accessed April 7, 2026. https://www.cnn.com/2026/01/07/health/food-preservatives-cancer-diabetes-wellness

Researchers of a recent study evaluated whether type 2 diabetes screening using at-home self-sampling HbA1c kits is feasible and cost-effective in Denmark for adults aged 50 to 75 who had not had an HbA1c test in the prior 2 years. In a 9-month pilot, 8000 people were invited and 36% successfully completed testing. Among those tested, 1.7% were newly identified with HbA1c levels in the diabetes range and another 10.2% had prediabetes-range HbA1c values. Participation was fairly consistent across age groups and slightly higher among women, while men had a somewhat higher detection rate. The findings suggest that mailing self-sampling kits can identify previously undiagnosed diabetes in an under-screened population and may complement more traditional clinic-based screening approaches.

The economic analysis suggested that this screening approach could be worthwhile at a population level. Assuming screening advances diagnosis by about 3 years, the authors estimated an average societal gain of €1514 per screen-detected individual. That was compared with a projected screening cost of €1183 per screen detected, for a return ratio of 1.28. In other words, each euro invested in the program was estimated to save about €1.28 through lower treatment costs and reduced lost income tied to diabetes complications. The authors note, however, that the model depends on several assumptions and a long-time horizon, so the cost-effectiveness results should be interpreted cautiously. Overall, the study concludes that at-home HbA1c self-sampling appears both feasible and potentially cost-effective, and it could serve as a useful complement to other diabetes screening strategies aimed at earlier detection.

Reference: Mateu NC, Rossing P, Neergaard KP, Thybo T. Feasibility and cost-effectiveness of at-home self-sampling screening for type 2 diabetes: a pilot screening study in Denmark. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2026 Feb 11;14(1):e005539. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2025-005539.

In a recent study, researchers examined how weekday sleep duration relates to estimated glucose disposal rate (eGDR), a marker of insulin sensitivity. They also explored whether weekend catch-up sleep (WCS) changes that relationship. Using NHANES data, the authors found an inverted U-shaped association between weekday sleep and eGDR, with the most favorable eGDR occurring at about 7.32 hours of weekday sleep. When weekday sleep was less than 7.32 hours, each additional hour of sleep was associated with higher eGDR, suggesting better metabolic status. But when weekday sleep was 7.32 hours or more, longer sleep was linked to lower eGDR, suggesting worse metabolic regulation. The relationship was especially notable in certain groups, including women, adults aged 40–59, and individuals with obesity.

Authors also explored whether sleeping more on weekends could offset short weekday sleep. Among people who slept less than 7.32 hours on weekdays, modest weekend catch-up sleep of up to 2 hours was associated with higher eGDR, suggesting a possible metabolic benefit. However, more than 2 hours of weekend catch-up sleep appeared to worsen the association between weekday sleep and eGDR, indicating that excessive catch-up sleep may be counterproductive. Overall, the authors suggest that both too little and too much weekday sleep may be linked to poorer metabolic health, and that moderate—rather than excessive—weekend recovery sleep may be the better strategy. They also note important limits, including the study’s cross-sectional design and reliance on self-reported sleep, meaning the findings show association rather than proof of cause and effect.

Reference: Fan Z, Wei R, Chen T, et al. Association of weekday sleep duration and estimated glucose disposal rate: the role of weekend catch-up sleep. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care. 2026 Mar 3;14(2):e005692. doi: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2025-005692.