There is a startling Consumer Report announcement this week that the respected organization has found a suspected cancer-causing chemical, 4-methylimidazole, or 4-MEI, in soft drinks. The presence of a human carcinogen will alarm many parents given the consumption of such drinks by children. The largest brand slammed in the report is Pepsi. It certainly makes the company’s “Live For Now” slogan a bit more menacing.
The chemical is used to add the brown color to soda and is found in other drinks like Coke. However, Coke has what is described as a “negligible cancer level” in any single can while Pepsi was much higher. Malta Goya, which is a Hispanic soft drink, is also particularly high in the chemical. California has recently required warned levels on the presence of 4-mei.
The possible market hit for Pepsi is huge. Many views Pepsi and Coke to be interchangeable and consumers may decide that Pepsi is “not 4-mei.”
We rarely let our kids drink soft drinks and, though I was once a huge consumer, I have been cutting back on my own consumption.
Pepsi responded to the study quickly by saying that the average amount of diet soda consumed by people is just 100 milliliters and thus the chemical is not a risk. That is not a particularly compelling spin since many people drink sodas in high quantities and one hundred milliliters is less than a third of a can of soda. A full can actually exceeds the California limit. As for Goya Foods, it is simply not responding which is equally chilling.
This could make for some legal challenges as a product defect, particularly when some companies have continued to use the chemical to a greater degree than others. With its main rival using less of the chemical, it is hard to argue that the reduction of the chemical would deprive Pepsi products of some essential component or ingredient. With the issuance of warnings in a major market like California, these companies are playing a dangerous game with a potential carcinogen in my view. The story also is likely to reaffirm the suspicion of many consumers that the federal government is not proactive in confronting major corporations on such risks.
Notably, this is not the first such danger associated with soft drinks. There is a growing movement to educate and discourage the consumption of the products. This is not just a movement linked to obesity but also diet sodas and the use of artificial sweeteners. This guy below may soon be viewed is a less than wholesome light if these studies continue to question the safety of that cultural American touchstone: the soda.
Of course, chocolate doesn’t have any sugar in it, right??? 🙂
Aw yes, moderation. That elusive thing 😉
To me, sugar is actually the bigger health threat. -annieofwi
And you’re right that we do have to be concerned about diabetes, etc. Having said this, I love my sugar in moderation. (:
I’m always on the lookout for alternative natural sweeteners, but most seem to be the sugar alcohols, which many folks can’t tolerate, talk about stomach issues, whew!
RWL, I’ve read that before regarding Spelnda. Perhaps sensitive people may react to it. I’ve never had an issues. I read the blog of a woman who writes low carb cookbooks and has used Splenda since it first came on to the market and she reports no ill effects. She even gave it to her children, in baked goods. To diabetic children and adults it’s been a boon. I’ve avoided full blown diabetes with a sugar free and low carbohydrate diet for the last several years, after being diagnosed as pre diabetic. Ive used other artificial sweeteners and I don’t tolerate them, especially the sugar alcohols. Stevia is unpalatable to me. I think as the Livestrong article stated, it may be too soon to be able to tell if there are any real health risks. To me, sugar is actually the bigger health threat.
Kraaken wrote:
Feed anyone enough of anything for an extended period of time and you’re going to get cancer.
—-
Kraaken,
In the main, I completely agree with you, though I neglected to mention it in my last comment.
Annie:
Lol! Be careful about Splenda.
Please read the following article:
What are the Dangers of Splenda, Sucralose, and Aspartame?
by Jessica Jacobs
http://www.livestrong.com/article/447584-what-are-the-dangers-of-splenda-sucralose-and-aspartame/
There is also an interesting book, ‘Splenda: Is it safe or not’ by D. Janet Hull, delineating the ‘pontential harmful effects of Splenda.’
Kraaken
Feed anyone enough of anything for an extended period of time and you’re going to get cancer.
=====
Simply live long enough… and you’re going to get cancer.
Splenda is sucralose, not aspartame. I don’t know why more soda manufacturers don’t sweeten with Spelnda.
I occasionally drink Diet Rite raspberry or tangerine flavored soda. Sweetened with Splenda, low in sodium. Still probably not the best choices but if not consumed daily, I don see the harm.
Feed anyone enough of anything for an extended period of time and you’re going to get cancer.
rafflaw asked:
ap,
doesn’t the sugary Coke have this same bad coloring in it? I prefer Cherry Coke Zero or a Diet Dr. Pepper when I can’t get the coke zero.
====
Yes, but a tad less of it, I think. (:
As for the diet stuff, I prefer sugar (and a lot of exercise) rather than the phoney soda, which tastes simply awful, IMO. There’s something about the sugar, coupled with the fizz, that’s oh, so good.
LDL,
There used to be a place in Dublin,Texas that was the original Mfg of Dr Pepper….. It was named in honor of the creator of the soda after a Dr. That didn’t think a pharmacist was suitable enough to marry his daughter….. Hence, disrespect intended with no period after Dr ….
As a matter of fact the titled owners of the brand shut down the Dr Pepper operation in Dublin just about a year ago…. Which was still made with cane sugar…. I will say there is nothing quite as good as one straight from the fountain……
All the more reason for a crap tax. The poisons that are marketed, that end up costing us all through the medical industry, should be taxed proportionately with the cost of diabetes, obesity, heart disease, etc. Yes, we should be free to do as we please even if it means impaired health and an early death. However, we all share the cost of the health industry one way or another. You would think a ‘pay at the pump’ system would be forwarded by the republican party or even the libertarian party. The problem is that those guys are in the pockets of the poison manufacturers and it would be bad for business if we had to pay for our health costs.
ap,
doesn’t the sugary Coke have this same bad coloring in it? I prefer Cherry Coke Zero or a Diet Dr. Pepper when I can’t get the coke zero.
“Maybe the Excedrin isn’t as bad as the pop!” -rafflaw
I’d probably take the Excedrin (great stuff for a migraine, IME) and wash it down with some ice-cold, sugar-laced Coke. (:
AY;
I know what you mean, that’s why (every once in a while) we go to Galco’s – when I’m out in SoCal. It has the original formula of DR. P and other flovors long gone!
It is in Huntington Park, CA
I still drink an occasional diet soda, but I have purposely cut back on the consumption. They are my one way of getting caffeine since I don’t drink coffee or tea. I drink one when I feel a migraine coming on because it sometimes stops the migraine or the need to take Excedrin. Maybe the Excedrin isn’t as bad as the pop!
mr. ed,
Thanks. (:
Growing up in the 50’s/60’s soda was a real treat in our house. We were older when my wife and I finally had kids. We saw how soda had become consumed in large quantities..Big Gulps for chrissake. So, we made soda a treat in our house. To our amazement, our 2 kids have not been the large consumers of soda as they went out on their own. Parenting, who knew??