However, the paper does offer a compelling causal mechanism. Also, it appears they performed follow-up pilot studies on the effects of erythritol consumption—as opposed to its simple presence in the blood. The following quote from the article is repeated in the linked Science commentary:
"The present studies suggest that following ingestion of an artificially sweetened food harboring typical levels of erythritol as artificial sweetener, plasma levels of erythritol remain elevated for many days, well above the thresholds necessary to enhance stimulus-dependent platelet reactivity, even among healthy volunteers."
I agree with Derek Lowe. I'll be avoiding erythritol until subsequent studies prove that it's safe.
This elevated level for many days, actually suggests it's not an intake problem:
> Witkowski et al. note that the vast majority of their study participants were enrolled prior to erythritol becoming a common sweetener and food additive. This, combined with the authors’ finding that erythritol levels remain well above the cohort ranges for at least a day after consumption, suggests that none of the cohort patients were consuming erythritol in their diets, and that the levels measured in fasting plasma samples were instead the result of endogenous production
"The present studies suggest that following ingestion of an artificially sweetened food harboring typical levels of erythritol as artificial sweetener, plasma levels of erythritol remain elevated for many days, well above the thresholds necessary to enhance stimulus-dependent platelet reactivity, even among healthy volunteers."
I agree with Derek Lowe. I'll be avoiding erythritol until subsequent studies prove that it's safe.