This article I find especially interesting because it isn't so much about the study itself, but the criticism that has formed around it. Scholars have called it "flawed" and "misleading" among other things. On the other hand, the authors of the study are claiming that the corn refiners are behind these attacks. The curious thing about this is audiences will not know whom to believe. Whose study is more credible? More valid?
The answers lie in the basics; one must evaluate experimental design, procedures, and methods to form their own opinion. Personally, I find it hard to be convinced the new study is accurate. The fact that they used past data and manipulated it alone is enough for me to discredit it. In order to know what would truly happen when a variable changes one must conduct an experiment, not merely speculate.
Research Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/business/new-scrutiny-for-diabetes-and-sweeteners.html?src=recg