Guest sibon Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 Caffeine has never been proved as negative in any way. As for Coke the sugar content is the most damaging ingrediant in that product I don't know about that. I'd rather eat sugar than drink Phosphoric Acid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harleyman Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 I don't know about that. I'd rather eat sugar than drink Phosphoric Acid. Try the product "Equal" (if it's available in the UK) as a substitute for sugar next time you drink a cuppa You might get a pleasant surprise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinac Posted October 17, 2010 Author Share Posted October 17, 2010 I'd rather eat sugar than drink Phosphoric Acid. I'm guessing if anybody could prove that Coke was harmful in anyway. there'd be lawyers queuing up to sue them for millions ... From Wikipedia: Although numerous court cases have been filed against The Coca-Cola Company since the 1920s, alleging that the acidity of the drink is dangerous, no evidence corroborating this claim has been found. Under normal conditions, scientific evidence indicates Coca-Cola's acidity causes no immediate harm. Maybe one day somebody will prove long term harm???? Coke may not be the most healthy choice of drink, but it doesn't seem that it actually does any harm ... as opposed to smoking, the point I was making in the OP. We can worry about anything we like, but I like to restrict my worrying to what can be proven. Caffeine and coke are off my worry list ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 17, 2010 Share Posted October 17, 2010 I'm guessing if anybody could prove that Coke was harmful in anyway. there'd be lawyers queuing up to sue them for millions ... I wasn't suggesting that. I was simply commenting on the relative nastiness of the ingredients in their pure form. I'd imagine that proving that Coke was harmful would be very difficult, not least because they have a stellar legal team of their own. As an aside. I recently attended a lecture by Steve Jones. In it, he made the assertion that if Americans on average, reduced their fizzy pop consumption by one bottle per day, their obesity problems would disappear. He offered no proof, but I'd be surprised if a man of his stature made such a claim without reasonable grounds. Coke Zero, anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 19, 2010 Share Posted October 19, 2010 On average that might be true, but there are a lot of americans that don't drink a bottle every day, and a lot more who drink more than one, so in reality it isn't that easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sibon Posted October 19, 2010 Share Posted October 19, 2010 On average that might be true, but there are a lot of americans that don't drink a bottle every day, and a lot more who drink more than one. I think that was his point. Not all Americans drink loads of fizzy sugary drinks, not all Americans are obese. Maybe the two are linked. Mr Jones seemed sure that they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted October 19, 2010 Share Posted October 19, 2010 Ah but the anti aspartame link is a link to a holistic therapy website. They say the following... Between 1974 when aspartame was approved and 1990, the number of brain tumors in people over the age of 65 had increased by 67 percent. Um... except they offer no evidence and don't claim to have any evidence to link aspartame to the increase in brain tumours. Just pseudo-scientific nonsense really, that website. I'm not saying that this means aspartame is safe and healthy, but the type of people who tend to scare monger about it are the holistic lot to whom all chemicals are evil. Actually, many airline pilots have been doing the "scaremongering"... Pilots Report Serious Effects Many pilots appear to be particularly susceptible to the effects of aspartame ingestion. They have reported numerous serious toxicity effects including grand mal seizures in the cockpit (Stoddard 1995). Nearly 1,000 cases of pilot reactions have been reported to the Aspartame Consumer Safety Network Pilot Hotline (Stoddard 1995). This susceptibility may be related to ingesting methanol at altitude as suggested in a letter from Dr. Phil Moskal, Professor of Microbiology, Biochemistry, and Pathology, Chairman of the Department of Pathology, Director of Public Health Laboratories (Moskal 1990), or it may simply be that some pilots tend to ingest large quantities of aspartame during a flight. Back to Top Whatever the case, numerous warnings about aspartame dangers have appeared in piloting journals including; * The Aviation Consumer (1988), * Aviation Medical Bulliten (1988), * Pacific Flyer (1988), * CAA General Aviation (1989), * Aviation Safety Digest (1989), * General Aviation News (1989), * Plane & Pilot (1990), * Canadian General Aviation News (1990), * National Business Aircraft Association Digest (NBAA Digest 1993), * International Council of Air Shows (ICAS 1995) * Pacific Flyer (1995). Both the U.S. Air Force's magazine "Flying Safety" and the U.S. Navy's magazine, "Navy Physiology" published articles warning about the many dangers of aspartame including the cumulative deleterious effects of methanol and the greater likelihood of birth defects. The articles note that the ingestion of aspartame may make pilots more susceptible to seizures and vertigo (US Air Force 1992). More here... http://www.health-report.co.uk/aspartame-toxic-effects.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splodgeyAl Posted October 19, 2010 Share Posted October 19, 2010 I'm guessing if anybody could prove that Coke was harmful in anyway. there'd be lawyers queuing up to sue them for millions ... From Wikipedia: Although numerous court cases have been filed against The Coca-Cola Company since the 1920s, alleging that the acidity of the drink is dangerous, no evidence corroborating this claim has been found. Under normal conditions, scientific evidence indicates Coca-Cola's acidity causes no immediate harm. Maybe one day somebody will prove long term harm???? Coke may not be the most healthy choice of drink, but it doesn't seem that it actually does any harm ... as opposed to smoking, the point I was making in the OP. We can worry about anything we like, but I like to restrict my worrying to what can be proven. Caffeine and coke are off my worry list ... Coke (a Cola especially) does do harm. But mostly in the form of taking drinking water from many of the world's poorest communities... http://www.indiaresource.org/campaigns/coke/ Communities across India are under assault from Coca-Cola practices in the country. A pattern has emerged as a result of Coca-Cola's bottling operations in India. * Communities across India living around Coca-Cola's bottling plants are experiencing severe water shortages, directly as a result of Coca-Cola's massive extraction of water from the common groundwater resource. The wells have run dry and the hand water pumps do not work any more. Studies, including one by the Central Ground Water Board in India, have confirmed the significant depletion of the water table. * When the water is extracted from the common groundwater resource by digging deeper, the water smells and tastes strange. Coca-Cola has been indiscriminately discharging its waste water into the fields around its plant and sometimes into rivers, including the Ganges, in the area. The result has been that the groundwater has been polluted as well as the soil. Public health authorities have posted signs around wells and hand pumps advising the community that the water is unfit for human consumption. * In two communities, Plachimada and Mehdiganj, Coca-Cola was distributing its solid waste to farmers in the area as "fertilizer". Tests conducted by the BBC found cadmium and lead in the waste, effectively making the waste toxic waste. Coca-Cola stopped the practice of distributing its toxic waste only when ordered to do so by the state government. * Tests conducted by a variety of agencies, including the government of India, confirmed that Coca-Cola products contained high levels of pesticides, and as a result, the Parliament of India has banned the sale of Coca-Cola in its cafeteria. However, Coca-Cola not only continues to sell drinks laced with poisons in India (that could never be sold in the US and EU), it is also introducing new products in the Indian market. And as if selling drinks with DDT and other pesticides to Indians was not enough, one of Coca-Cola's latest bottling facilities to open in India, in Ballia, is located in an area with a severe contamination of arsenic in its groundwater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spinac Posted October 19, 2010 Author Share Posted October 19, 2010 Coke (a Cola especially) does do harm. But mostly in the form of taking drinking water from many of the world's poorest communities... I wasn't trying to defend them as an ethical company ... just looking for facts about whether it is safe for me to drink. I've taken to drinking diet coke as an alternative to beer mid-week after work. At the moment I'm happy with the switch ... it's just something chilled and fizzy from the fridge and I actually do like the taste. There's no alcohol to damage my liver, and as far as I can judge, from what I've read the aspartame scare is just that - a scare over nowt. Those pilots seem to have got their knickers in a twist over naff all. I'll consider any alternative ... something inexpensive, low-cal, alcohol free, fizzy, chilled and tasty ... not rola cola though http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9DKlR5NYQ0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.