Two sugary sodas a day double the risk of gout in men.
Original statement
ولهذا وجد Choi و Curhan في BMJ عام 2008 أن شرب علبتين سكريتين يومياً يضاعف خطر النقرس لدى الرجال.
verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.
Translation
Two sugary sodas a day double the risk of gout in men.
Origin
- Source status
- Archive editors
- Attribution
- Archive editors (study selection and narrative are the archive's, not necessarily Elawady's)
- Origin
- https://eltayebat.com/rule/soda/
- Attribution uncertainty
- The archive homepage states that the forbidden-food section is supported by research 'independently of Dr. Diaa's words'. No evidence was found that Elawady himself cited these studies.
- Claimed mechanism
Fructose raises uric acid.
- Claimed health effect
Gout.
- Population concerned
Men
- Geographic restriction by Elawady
none found
Scientific assessment
Mostly true – Correct at its core, but with limitations or minor inaccuracies.
Certainty of evidence: low – Further research is likely to change the assessment considerably.
1. What was claimed?
Two daily sugary sodas double gout risk in men.
2. What is demonstrably correct?
Choi 2008 (A-SOD-06): RR 1.85 (1.08-3.16) for >=2 servings/day vs <1/month; diet soft drinks were not associated. Jamnik 2016 (I-SOD-05) meta-analysis of 2 cohorts: highest vs lowest fructose intake RR 1.62 (1.28-2.03).
3. What is wrong or exaggerated?
'Double' rounds 1.85 upward; the confidence interval is wide. Pooled evidence shows about 35% higher risk for highest vs lowest SSB intake (RR 1.35, 1.18-1.55; I-SUG-02), not a doubling; that umbrella review's results text attributes the per-serving gout estimate to artificially sweetened beverages, inconsistent with its abstract. The same study found fructose-rich fruits and fruit juice also associated with gout risk, which the archive does not mention.
4. What remains unclear?
Evidence outside white health professionals.
5. Which studies support it?
A-SOD-06, I-SOD-05, I-SUG-02 (RR 1.35 highest vs lowest), I-SUG-03 (EFSA: moderate certainty, >50-75% probability, of a causal SSB-gout relationship; external validity for Europe unclear).
6. Which studies contradict it?
None found.
7. What applies to Germany and Europe?
Applies; no EU-specific data reviewed.
8. What is known about Egypt?
Sugar-sweetened soft drinks are widely sold in Egypt. No Egypt-specific study was reviewed for this claim; the physiological mechanisms and cohort findings are not known to differ by country, but absolute risks depend on local consumption and disease rates.
9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?
People with gout are commonly advised to limit sugary drinks and juices.
Assessment details
- Rationale for certainty of evidence
Two cohorts of mostly white health professionals; dose-response; GRADE low because of indirectness (I-SOD-05).
- Source quality
Number slightly rounded upward ('double' for RR 1.85, CI 1.08-3.16).
- Regional transferability
Moderate (cohorts from the US; physiology general).
- Individual exceptions
People with existing hyperuricaemia or gout are most concerned.
- Regional scope of the claim
- general (biological/medical)
- Last reviewed
- 25 October 2026 provisional
In plain language
Men who drank two or more sugary sodas a day developed gout more often (about 85% more) in a large US study. A pooled analysis of fructose intake points the same way, but the evidence is limited to few studies. Fruit juice was also linked to gout in the same study.
Studies on this claim
Studies supporting the claim (4)
-
Soft drinks and gout in men
Choi HK, Curhan G. BMJ 2008 · PMID 18244959 · DOI 10.1136/bmj.39449.819271.BECohort studycited by the Tayebat archiveabstract only checkedTwo or more sugary sodas a day: 85% higher gout risk; fruit juice also linked; diet soda not.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Are sugar-sweetened soft drinks and fructose associated with incident gout in men?
- How was the study done?
Prospective cohort over 12 years (HPFS); validated FFQs.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
46,393; 755 incident gout cases; Male health professionals without gout
- What was actually found?
SSB 5-6/week RR 1.29 (1.00-1.68); 1/day 1.45 (1.02-2.08); >=2/day 1.85 (1.08-3.16); diet soft drinks not associated; fructose top fifth RR 2.02 (1.49-2.75); fruit juice and fructose-rich fruits also associated (P trend <0.05).
- How large was the observed effect?
RR 1.85 (1.08-3.16)
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Sugary drinks and juices may raise gout risk.
- What are the study's limitations?
Men health professionals only; Wide CI at highest intake; Observational design; residual confounding possible; Self-reported dietary intake
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Effect in women; causation.
-
Fructose and gout: meta-analysis
Jamnik J et al.. BMJ Open 2016 · PMID 27697882 · DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013191Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract only checkedHigh fructose intake was linked with 62% higher gout risk in two cohorts; certainty low.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Is fructose associated with incident gout/hyperuricaemia?
- How was the study done?
Systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohorts with GRADE.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
2 cohorts; 125,299; 1,533 gout cases; Predominantly white health professionals
- What was actually found?
RR 1.62 (1.28-2.03), I2 0%; GRADE low (indirectness).
- How large was the observed effect?
RR 1.62 (1.28-2.03)
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Fructose from any source may matter for gout.
- What are the study's limitations?
Only 2 cohorts; Indirect population
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports C-SOD-05 (with limitations).
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Causation.
-
Sugar and health: umbrella review
Huang Y et al.. BMJ 2023 · PMID 37019448 · DOI 10.1136/bmj-2022-071609Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key studyAcross 73 meta-analyses, high sugar intake was linked to 45 adverse outcomes; authors advise under 25 g/day of added sugar.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Quality and validity of evidence on sugar and health outcomes.
- How was the study done?
Umbrella review of 73 meta-analyses.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
73 meta-analyses; 83 outcomes; Humans free of acute/chronic disease
- What was actually found?
Significant harmful associations with 45 outcomes; moderate-quality: SSB and body weight, added sugars and ectopic fat; low-quality: +4% gout per SSB serving/week, +17% CHD and +4% all-cause mortality per 250 mL/day SSB; recommends free/added sugars <25 g/day and SSB <1 serving/week.
- How large was the observed effect?
CHD +17% per 250 mL/d SSB
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
High sugar intake is more harmful than beneficial.
- What are the study's limitations?
Most evidence is observational and of low certainty, and concerns sugary drinks rather than sugar in foods; sucrose intake was even linked to slightly lower diabetes risk in some cohorts; recommendations go beyond the strength of the evidence.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
It cannot show that sugar in any form or small amount is harmful, nor precise effect sizes; it does not cover honey, fruit or sugars eaten in solid foods well.
-
EFSA: how much sugar is safe?
EFSA NDA Panel et al.. EFSA J 2022 · PMID 35251356 · DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7074Risk assessmentindependent cross-checkfull text checked★ key studyEFSA found no safe intake level and advises keeping added and free sugars as low as possible.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Can a UL or safe level for dietary sugars be set?
- How was the study done?
Regulatory scientific opinion with systematic reviews.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Not applicable; General population
- What was actually found?
Sugars are a well-established hazard for caries; RCTs on surrogate endpoints show causal positive relationship of added/free sugars with obesity and dyslipidaemia (moderate certainty), NAFLD and T2D (low), hypertension (very low); no safe level identified; intake of added and free sugars should be as low as possible in a nutritionally adequate diet.
- How large was the observed effect?
Not applicable
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Applies to sugar, honey and syrups alike.
- What are the study's limitations?
Trials looked at markers (weight, liver fat, blood fats) rather than diseases; cohort studies mostly compared sugar with other calories at equal total energy; few data below 10% of energy.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts C-SUG-01, C-SUG-05 (health relevance); supports C-SOD-01.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Directly applicable in EU/Germany.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
It cannot name a safe daily amount of sugar; it does not show that sugar is harmful when it does not add extra calories, except for tooth decay.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (0)
No studies in this group.
Studies with mixed or unclear results (0)
No studies in this group.
Regional context
Germany / EU
Applies; no EU-specific data reviewed.
Egypt
Sugar-sweetened soft drinks are widely sold in Egypt. No Egypt-specific study was reviewed for this claim; the physiological mechanisms and cohort findings are not known to differ by country, but absolute risks depend on local consumption and disease rates.
What applies in my country?
General scientific assessment
Mostly true Sugary sodas are linked with gout; 'double' is a slight rounding-up of an imprecise estimate.
The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:
- Additives and processing
Honey, sugar, sweets
Choose a country to see the checked information for it.
Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.
Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country
References
- Soft drinks, fructose consumption, and the risk of gout in men: prospective cohort study.. Choi HK, Curhan G. BMJ 2008 · PMID 18244959 · DOI 10.1136/bmj.39449.819271.BE
- Fructose intake and risk of gout and hyperuricemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.. Jamnik J et al.. BMJ Open 2016 · PMID 27697882 · DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013191
- Dietary sugar consumption and health: umbrella review.. Huang Y et al.. BMJ 2023 · PMID 37019448 · DOI 10.1136/bmj-2022-071609
- Tolerable upper intake level for dietary sugars.. EFSA NDA Panel et al.. EFSA J 2022 · PMID 35251356 · DOI 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7074