Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

money.cnn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 126 posts

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#41

Post by agumonkey »

hissworks wrote: post #25
agumonkey wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My body rejects processed foods nowadays, I'm somehow forced to eat raw everything. It's funny how so many tastes there are. Now I now there's enjoyable tastes outside the usual junk food. But, I miss the feel of carb + sugar + fat, it really does push all your brains button :)

How do avocados fare as a substitute?

Pretty fine, but it's not a common thing to eat though. Raw salad, carrots and tomato, with a pinch of salt and vinegar. A bit of meat. One thing I recently discovered is that whole grain mueslies do feel nice on your mouth without triggering pain in my case. Maybe more fibers that help feeling satiated.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#42

Post by Someone1234 »

stuaxo wrote: post #33
DarkTree wrote: post #2

I'm not surprised some Starbucks drinks have a ton of sugar, but the 3 cans of Coke worth definitely puts it into perspective. I grew up drinking my coffee with sugar and cream, but eventually stopped using sugar, and then ultimately drinking it black. If you can wean off adding compliments to your coffee, you will most likely acquire a taste for the bitterness of coffee. Once you begin loving the true taste of coffe…

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people make it up with quantity.

I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee?

I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#43

Post by jkestner »

makecheck wrote: post #38

The sugar or calories in any particular item generally isn’t a problem. The actual problem is the rate of consumption. People drink stuff like this in ridiculous quantities, and then make it even worse by developing a daily habit . I also find it weird that you don’t often see people set aside “half” of their beverage to finish it later; rather, they sip and sip and sip until it’s gone. By that logic, simply reducing…

  The real problem is the rate of consumption.
This is why fruit juice is about as bad for you as soda. It's like eating several oranges, without the fiber that would fill you up quickly.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#45

Post by pkaye »

Someone1234 wrote: post #42
stuaxo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people make it up with quantity.

I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.

I'm not a coffee drinker but I guess people go there for the convenience and consistency.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#46

Post by tracker1 »

asgfoi wrote: post #6

How sad it is that the can of coke is used as a comparison. It almost makes it look like a reasonable drink. The World Health Organization has recently suggested cutting the recommended sugar intake for adults in half, to about 25 grams, around 6 teaspoons, of sugar for a normal weight adult a day. Here is my favorite site that shows the amounts of sugar cubes in various unhealthy food: http://www.sugarstacks.com/ Ac…

I think that's referring to refined sugars... as a diabetic, I tend to pay more attention to glycemic load... making an effort to keep it under 40 (max) at any meal, and under 100 per day, which is hard... iirc, the sugars/day should be around or under 100g for most people, with at least half of that coming from natural, unrefined sources (fruit/veg).

Absorption is a big piece... fruit smoothies are much easier to absorb, for example than whole fruit, which contains fiber which inhibits absorption.

For the most part, if you don't get more than half your calories from any macro source (carb, protein, fat, alcohol), and have some variety to your diet, once you get enough protein to support your body, calories are calories. Some people have medical conditions that mean they should limit some sources... but that's the exception.

The issue is that people don't pay attention to these things.. or consider the calories of drinks and snacks in their daily input... if most people wrote down everything they consumed for a week, calculated the macros, and tracked their weight a couple times a day, it would be eye opening. I tend to reach for water more often than not (2-3 liters or so a day) and about 1 liters of other beverages a day.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#47

Post by navait »

Someone1234 wrote: post #42
stuaxo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people make it up with quantity.

I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.

If you are really into coffee, mass produced is cool to hate on, and the best is what you make yourself. I enjoy the coffee, but it's not the best I ever had. Of course, in my area it's the only option over Dunkin Donuts or Mcdonalds, which I do not like.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#48

Post by mattdotc »

Someone1234 wrote: post #42
stuaxo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people make it up with quantity.

I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.

>If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee?

I can't speak for every Starbucks customer out there, but I always assumed the reason is that it's a status symbol.

To some degree, they want to be seen with the cup. They haven't tried the competitors, so they assume Starbucks must be very good to justify the price. If they really enjoyed coffee for coffee's sake, they'd probably be going to an independent shop for their drink.

I think Starbucks' coffee isn't terrible, but I definitely prefer to brew it myself or spend the same amount at a smaller cafe, preferably if they roast their own beans.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#49

Post by fluxquanta »

Someone1234 wrote: post #42
stuaxo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people make it up with quantity.

I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.

People don't pay $3 for plain Starbucks coffee. They pay $3 for the atmosphere of the shop and the availability of a halfway decent public bathroom.

Re: Starbucks has 3x the sugar of a whole Coke in some drinks

#50

Post by rorykoehler »

Someone1234 wrote: post #42
stuaxo wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It helps to have coffee that is actually decent, which you don't get in Starbucks. A lot of low quality food and drink seems way less satisfying, so people make it up with quantity.

I don't drink Starbucks (too expensive for me) so this is a legitimate question: I thought Starbucks coffee was meant to be good/high quality? If it isn't why are people spending over $3/cup when McDonald's and others has $1/cup coffee? I'm legitimately asking, I'm not into the whole Starbucks scene.

I drink a ton of coffee, rarely Starbucks or any other Corp coffee, and I think mcd coffee tastes miles better.
Post reply on HN