Currently viewing the category: "Coca-Cola Co."

Coke and Pepsi to Remove Cancer Causing Ingredient

By On · Add Comment · In 4-MEI, anti-cancerous, birth defects, California, carcinogen, Coca-Cola Co., PepsiCo, Proposition 65, sodas, soft drinks

No secret that I am anti-soft drinks. Funny because I am not much anti-anything, believe it or not. But I don’t like sodas–not for me, not for my children, and not for others. It’s garbage. Liquid sugar. No nutritional value whatsoever. Ten teaspoons of sugar per can…need I go on?

Well, it appears as if Coke and Pepsi also contain a cancer causing ingredient, one that I know at least I was unaware of, called 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI), a major component of the caramel coloring the sodas sports.

According to recent statements, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have decided to lower the amount of 4-MEI in their soft drinks to comply with California standards that relate to findings that high levels of the chemical are shown to cause cancer in laboratory rats. Nice.

Not that either company actually cares about the health and safety of their customers, but they would have had to place a warning label on their liquid sugar product which discloses that it contains a known carcinogen. And what do you think that might have done to sales?

Both companies are probably resting assuredly that very few of their addicted consumers will ever find out about the cancer causing agent that has been a part of their drinks for decades. Indeed both companies assure shareholders that the changes will go unnoticed by addicts (and those not reading this blog).

“We are NOT changing our recipe; or our formula,” Coca-Cola Company spokesman Ben Sheidler told AFP in an email. No just the toxic coloring. Bravo liquid sugar manufacturers.

“What we did do is direct our caramel suppliers to make a manufacturing process modification in order to reduce the level of 4-MEI in our caramel so as to meet the requirement set by the state of California’s Proposition 65.”

California voters passed Proposition 65 in 1986, and the law aims to protect state residents from “chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm, and to inform citizens about exposures to such chemicals.” 4-MEI was listed as a known carcinogen under Prop 65 in 2011.
Now mind you, both Coca-Cola and PepsiCo deny any health risk whatsoever, despite their products containing up to five times more 4-MEI than California standards. And not without a fight: The companies actually lost a battle against the state of California that dragged on for three years. The soda manufacturer’s argument: Trace amounts of 4-MEI are not sufficient to cause cancer in people. 
So let me get this straight. California has found 4-MEI–a compound used as caramel coloring, not just in soda but in soy sauce, coffee, bread, molasses, gravy and some beers–to be a carcinogen. And these companies have wasted time and money fighting on the grounds that, “It’s just a little cancer causing…and only in lab rats.” Yes, rats are always catching cancer in the lab…dumb rodents. That has nothing to do with you or me. 
Listen up liquid sugar pushers: You know damn well that if the public ever found out that you have a known carcinogen in your product, even if in just trace amounts, not one person would buy it. Not one. That’s why you caved in, because you would have been forced to label it, and there’d go your cash cow. 
Like I’ve said before, I’m a capitalist to the core, but providing a product that has a questionable ingredient, and then trying to be deceitful about it–and that’s what non-disclosure is, deceitful–is atrocious. You can minimize the issue all you want to, but you know that justice is often carried out in the marketplace. And your response speaks volumes.

Soda Marketing Targets Black & Hispanic Youth

By On · Add Comment · In American Beverage Association, Black children, childhood obesity, Coca-Cola Co., Hispanic children, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, sodas

The Yale University Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity report I discussed last post discloses the youth market-grab that soda manufacturers are carrying out in an attempt to secure future sales. For a product like soft drinks, it’s all about brand loyalty, and people set their preferences early on. The big guns in the current soda marketing campaign are Coca-Cola Co and Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc, the report found.

Successful companies study their markets and invest in wooing their top consumers, something to think about if you (or your child) fall into one of the following categories:

  • Black children and teens saw 80-90% more ads than white children, including twice as many for the 5-Hour Energy drink and Coca-Cola’s vitamin water and Sprite.
  • Hispanic children saw 49% more ads for sugary drinks and energy drinks on Spanish-language television, and Hispanic teens saw 99% more ads.
  • In 2010, teens saw 18% more TV ads and heard 46% more radio ads for energy drinks than adults did.
  • 21 sugary drink brands had YouTube channels in 2010, with more than 229 million views by June 2011. Coca-Cola was the most popular brand on Facebook, with more than 30 million fans.
  • The most-visited websites operated by soft drink brands were MyCokeRewards.com and Capri Sun, which is owned by Kraft Foods Inc.
According to the CDC, 15% of children are overweight or obese, and no doubt in my mind that sodas are a major player in that phenomenon. Although I agree that sodas are not the stand alone cause of obesity, using that as a reason to dispute the validity of the above report makes about as much sense as excusing cigarette smoking for its role in lung cancer because air pollution is also a factor.
Susan Neely, Chief Executive Officer for the American Beverage Association said that member companies are “delivering on their commitment to advertise only water, juice and milk on programing for children under 12.”
But Yale’s Kelly Brownell, co-author of the report, says otherwise. He states that there has been a lot of research on the issue of marketing unhealthy food to children. Today’s report, he said, is the first that analyzed data from several firms, including Nielsen Holdings NV, to measure the full picture of youth exposure to marketing and advertising. He also said it is important to consider the online interaction children have with brands, especially since they tend to stay on computers longer than they watch TV commercials.
For anybody falling into one of these groups targeted by soda manufacturers–children, teens, and especially black and Hispanic youth–just understand how you are being wooed, and educate yourself on the risks of consuming large amounts of soft drinks. Understand that ingesting that much sugar (ten teaspoons per can) can lead to excessive weight gain, obesity, diabetes and other metabolic disturbances, as well as rotten teeth. And mind you that all of these body changes occur over an extended period, so just because you don’t see the physical effects happening right now, don’t think they won’t in time. Just take a look at some the adults around whom you might wonder exactly how they’ve morphed into what they have–and realize that could be just what you have to look forward to if you continue your soda habit.
I’m pleased this report has come out, although it’s nothing new in soft drink marketing. Makers of liquid sugar have been wooing kids from the start.  But now we are all watching.  We’ll see where it goes.

Bottled Water Ripoff

By On · Add Comment · In Aquafina, bottled water, Coca-Cola Co., Dasani, filtered, municipal water, natural spring water, PepsiCo, purifying, tap water
Well, well, well…Aquafina bottled water will soon be sporting labels disclosing their source – the good ‘ol tap! Whaddaya know. The bottled water industry has become so lucrative – $15 billion in sales in the U.S. alone – that major beverage players, PepsiCo and Coca-Cola Co., have their own brands, Aquafina and Dasani respectively, which they push on the American public.

C’mon Campos, take it easy – consumers have a choice don’t they? Not always. Try this sometime: Walk into a gas station convenience store, or in my neighborhood, the local Rite Aid, and you’ll see nothing but Aquafina. Hmmm….

Want to know why? It’s simple – here’s what they say: Carry our water exclusively or kiss Pepsi, Mug Root Beer, Mountain Dew, Sierra Mist, Slice, Lipton Ice Tea, and all the other liquid sugar drinks goodbye. Well, if Mountain Dew is your big seller, then you’ll carry Aquafina. I mean, it’s just water, right? Who the heck is going to know the difference?

Well now you do. Aquafina, Dasani, and any other bottled water that labels its source as municipal water is selling you tap water, plain and simple. True, it’s filtered tap water, which has already been previously filtered by the municipalities, but okay, it’s filtered again. But does that make it worth MORE than gasoline. That’s right, in some instances when you buy those brands (i.e., movie theaters, sports arenas, concerts), you are paying more than you do for gas.

That doesn’t mean all bottled water is a rip off. Natural spring water – like Arrowhead and Sparkletts – is different. It comes from naturally occurring springs and it’s also filtered and taken through the purifying process. It’s overpriced too, but at least it’s more than what you can get out of your home faucet. Yeah, I’ll drink Aquafina occasionally, like when I’m in a pinch, you know – need water, no other options available. Oh well, let me just go ahead and get the liquid jack. However, if I have the option, it’s always spring water. Or you can just buy a washer safe plastic sports bottle and fill it up yourself, if you can remember to pack it. But never, ever refill your Arrowhead bottle – it’s a breeding ground for bacteria. Other than that, if you don’t mind paying hard earned cash for water coming from some factory faucet, well…it’s your money.

Copyright © 2013 Dr. Nick Campos - All Rights Reserved.