39 ms·

1 can of coke contains 160% of your recommended daily intake of sugar. Lobbyists have worked hard to keep that information off the label, but it's true. Vessyl

1 can of coke contains 160% of your recommended daily intake of sugar. Lobbyists have worked hard to keep that information off the label, but it's true. Vessyl is an amazing feat of technology, but their messaging is confusing -- if they really want people to drink healthier, they should just encourage them to drink more water and less sugary drinks.

ianstallings 12y ago
And the damage to one's teeth from those drinks can be tremendous. Then there's this in diet soda: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methylimidazole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methylimidazole I recently stopped drinking diet soda because of its possible health concerns and switched to brewed tea. One day I'll be completely free of caffeine also, I'm weaning myself off by simply drinking more water. I really wish I had never started drinking caffeinated sugary drinks.
- sp332 12y ago
  That particular chemical looks completely harmless.
  - ianstallings 12y ago
    Did you read the section under health concerns citing scientific studies? It's compelling enough that the FDA is taking another look and the companies are trying to do damage control. Here's more info and you'll see that the companies are trying to reduce the amount of the chemical in their diet sodas: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/01/caramel-color-the-health-risk-that-may-be-in-your-soda/index.htm http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/01/caramel-colo...
    - sp332 12y ago
      All the health effects were found in animals at incredibly high doses. California added it to a list, so the soda companies are only changing their formulas to meet CA's regulations, not because of any health effects. In consideration of tumor occurrence in the NTP rat studies, the NTP concluded that there was equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity in female rats based on the occurrence of mononuclear cell leukemia and no evidence of carcinogenicity in male rats. Section 25703(a)(3) states that “risk analysis shall be based on the most sensitive study deemed to be of sufficient quality.” The NTP studies in male and female rats were not sensitive and thus are not used for the dose response assessment. Thus, while the studies were considered, they were rejected for NSRL development due to lack of sensitivity. http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/pdf_zip/100711_4MEIfindings.pdf http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/pdf_zip/100711_4MEIfindin... So California basically ignored some of the evidence.
GuiA 12y ago
> they should just encourage them to drink more water and less sugary drinks. This is a US based company. The USA is a country where water is close to being unheard of as a drink. Kids in school mostly drink milk (genuine WTF moment for me as a European kid who moved to the US), most restaurants either have soda fountains or try to upsell you on other drinks, soccer moms bring Gatorade/Powerade to their kids, etc.. I've been to restaurants where the waiter seems genuinely pissed when you ask for pitchers of water for the table and nothing else. I guess you can't make much money from water (unless you convince the average American that the water from their tap is dirty and full of germs, in which case you can sell them placebo filters that you have to renew every other month), and that doesn't fly in the country where dollar is king.
- Mandatum 12y ago
  To be fair in a lot of places a water filter makes sense but in most cities where I assume you're talking about the type of people who buy bottled water when their mains water is just as good (in some cases better), you have a point. Having flashbacks to putrid dead-rat water in rural New Zealand.. shudder
- tvdijk 12y ago
  Huh? As a European living in the US, I've had the opposite impression. I've never been to another place where every restaurant will automatically give me a free glass of water (and continuously refills it) without me even asking for it. I've also never gotten a dirty look for sticking with just water. In Europe, you generally have to pay for bottled water, unless you specifically ask for tap water (and get a dirty look in response).
Mandatum 12y ago
There's 35g of sugar in a 330ml can of coke[1]. The recommended daily intake of sugar is 90g. So it's 38.9% of your RDI, not 160%.. [1]http://www.fatsecret.com.au/calories-nutrition/coca-cola/coca-cola-(330-ml)/1-serving http://www.fatsecret.com.au/calories-nutrition/coca-cola/coc...
- joshfraser 12y ago
  The exact amount of sugar in coke varies by geography, but in the US, it's 39g per 330ml can. The World Health Organization recently lowered the daily recommended intake of sugar to 5% or less of your daily caloric intake or roughly 25g/day.
  - Mandatum 12y ago
    Ah cool, good to know. Just looked at their website and you're correct. I'm pretty glad you proved me wrong.

ianstallings 12y ago

And the damage to one's teeth from those drinks can be tremendous. Then there's this in diet soda: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methylimidazole http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methylimidazole I recently stopped drinking diet soda because of its possible health concerns and switched to brewed tea. One day I'll be completely free of caffeine also, I'm weaning myself off by simply drinking more water. I really wish I had never started drinking caffeinated sugary drinks.

sp332 12y ago
That particular chemical looks completely harmless.
- ianstallings 12y ago
  Did you read the section under health concerns citing scientific studies? It's compelling enough that the FDA is taking another look and the companies are trying to do damage control. Here's more info and you'll see that the companies are trying to reduce the amount of the chemical in their diet sodas: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/01/caramel-color-the-health-risk-that-may-be-in-your-soda/index.htm http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/01/caramel-colo...
  - sp332 12y ago
    All the health effects were found in animals at incredibly high doses. California added it to a list, so the soda companies are only changing their formulas to meet CA's regulations, not because of any health effects. In consideration of tumor occurrence in the NTP rat studies, the NTP concluded that there was equivocal evidence of carcinogenicity in female rats based on the occurrence of mononuclear cell leukemia and no evidence of carcinogenicity in male rats. Section 25703(a)(3) states that “risk analysis shall be based on the most sensitive study deemed to be of sufficient quality.” The NTP studies in male and female rats were not sensitive and thus are not used for the dose response assessment. Thus, while the studies were considered, they were rejected for NSRL development due to lack of sensitivity. http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/pdf_zip/100711_4MEIfindings.pdf http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/pdf_zip/100711_4MEIfindin... So California basically ignored some of the evidence.

GuiA 12y ago

> they should just encourage them to drink more water and less sugary drinks. This is a US based company. The USA is a country where water is close to being unheard of as a drink. Kids in school mostly drink milk (genuine WTF moment for me as a European kid who moved to the US), most restaurants either have soda fountains or try to upsell you on other drinks, soccer moms bring Gatorade/Powerade to their kids, etc.. I've been to restaurants where the waiter seems genuinely pissed when you ask for pitchers of water for the table and nothing else. I guess you can't make much money from water (unless you convince the average American that the water from their tap is dirty and full of germs, in which case you can sell them placebo filters that you have to renew every other month), and that doesn't fly in the country where dollar is king.

Mandatum 12y ago
To be fair in a lot of places a water filter makes sense but in most cities where I assume you're talking about the type of people who buy bottled water when their mains water is just as good (in some cases better), you have a point. Having flashbacks to putrid dead-rat water in rural New Zealand.. shudder
tvdijk 12y ago
Huh? As a European living in the US, I've had the opposite impression. I've never been to another place where every restaurant will automatically give me a free glass of water (and continuously refills it) without me even asking for it. I've also never gotten a dirty look for sticking with just water. In Europe, you generally have to pay for bottled water, unless you specifically ask for tap water (and get a dirty look in response).

Mandatum 12y ago

There's 35g of sugar in a 330ml can of coke[1]. The recommended daily intake of sugar is 90g. So it's 38.9% of your RDI, not 160%.. [1]http://www.fatsecret.com.au/calories-nutrition/coca-cola/coca-cola-(330-ml)/1-serving http://www.fatsecret.com.au/calories-nutrition/coca-cola/coc...

joshfraser 12y ago
The exact amount of sugar in coke varies by geography, but in the US, it's 39g per 330ml can. The World Health Organization recently lowered the daily recommended intake of sugar to 5% or less of your daily caloric intake or roughly 25g/day.
- Mandatum 12y ago
  Ah cool, good to know. Just looked at their website and you're correct. I'm pretty glad you proved me wrong.