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

The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 244 posts

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#131

Post by arethuza »

hugh4 wrote: post #99
kw71 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Under a socialized healthcare regime, every sick person is a problem for the whole society in that we have to pay for it. So, being careless with your health is a crime against the people. If you are in the USA, consider that you have been funding healthcare for some of the worst offenders for decades by paying taxes which fund hospitals. Now with the healthcare reforms in mind, which have itemized your contribution…

Which is precisely why some of us are opposed to socialised healthcare. Once you have it, every little decision you make becomes everyone else's business.

You make "socialised healthcare" sounds like we have a NHS food police tracking us and sending us off to a health re-education camp if we don't eat 5 bits of fruit and veg a day.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#132

Post by adventured »

caseysoftware wrote: post #57
klenwell wrote: post #25

When Mr. Nutter was fighting the soda tax battle, he kept a bottle of Mountain Dew and a container with 17 teaspoons of sugar — the amount in the bottle — on the table in the center of his office. It was a good “conversation piece,” he said, about the surprising number of calories in a typical soda. I think this is key. Better information and transparency is having an effect. I'm glad to hear we're approaching a poin…

That's why we haven't had anyone start smoking in decades.. Soda sales are down but obesity is still up, so the calories are coming from somewhere. If you believe the other common stories, we're drinking the calories. I'd wager they come from the rise of coffee-based beverages - which would not be considered soda - but I don't have data to back that up.

Coffee based beverages don't explain childhood and teen obesity. Those two categories don't drink nearly as much coffee as adults.

Besides that, some categories of obesity have plunged:

"U.S. Childhood Obesity Rates Fall 40% in Decade"

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527023048347045794053...

Adult obesity rates have leveled off for the last several years. I don't believe it's a coincidence things are moving in a better direction at exactly the same time Americans started drinking less soda (such that both Coke and Pepsi have been seeing declining sales in the US market for the last few years). What Americans aren't doing less of, is consuming fewer coffee products - they're drinking vastly more than they were ten years ago. If that were fueling obesity we'd be seeing a continued increase in obesity among adults.

Further, the obesity rates skyrocketed starting from the early 1980s. They trace almost perfectly inline with soda, fast food, and high fructose corn syrup. They don't follow any line with the vast array of coffee products, which only took off in the mid to late 1990s.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#133

Post by kuschku »

bsder wrote: post #123
caseysoftware wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why we haven't had anyone start smoking in decades.. Soda sales are down but obesity is still up, so the calories are coming from somewhere. If you believe the other common stories, we're drinking the calories. I'd wager they come from the rise of coffee-based beverages - which would not be considered soda - but I don't have data to back that up.

> Soda sales are down but obesity is still up, so the calories are coming from somewhere. A recent study showed that people in earlier years ate the same number of calories but were still thinner. It's more complex than calories. I suspect they're going to find that nicotine (lack thereof in current society) is the culprit. That's not to say we should go back, but it's not just "calories".

The largest difference is movement. Which helps keep down obesity in many other nations: If you walk everywhere, or bike, or use transit for 90% of what you do, you will burn a lot more calories (especially grocery shopping and carrying them home via the metro).

Compared to driving everywhere, sitting at work, etc...

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#134

Post by fennecfoxen »

hisham_hm wrote: post #129

"Soda companies" are already moving to controlling water supply in many countries. In Brazil, it's already hard to find in some stores water which is not owned by either Coca-Cola or Nestlé.

Does the "water supply" of most citizens of most countries come from a grocery store? Or does it still come from things like municipal plumbing or rural wells?

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#135

Post by adventured »

twic wrote: post #19
chrisseaton wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think my local supermarket sells bottled water for as little as 19p (29c) for 2 litres, as as much as about £2 ($3) so I think you are mistaken.

That stuff is probably more or less tap water: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/tesco-and-as... Not that there's anything wrong with that. Actual spring water is uniformly 45p for two litres: http://www.tesco.com/groceries/product/details/?id=258016736 http://www.sainsburys.co.uk/shop/gb/groceries/sparkling-wate... http://groceries.asda.com/product/sparkling-water/asda-eden-... https://groceries.morris…

Bottled water is dirt cheap in the US.

I pay $4-$5 for 24 to 32 packs for Deer Park Water, which isn't tap water (but is owned by Nestle). $0.16 per bottle for spring water is incredibly cheap.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#136

Post by adventured »

arethuza wrote: post #131
hugh4 wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is precisely why some of us are opposed to socialised healthcare. Once you have it, every little decision you make becomes everyone else's business.

You make "socialised healthcare" sounds like we have a NHS food police tracking us and sending us off to a health re-education camp if we don't eat 5 bits of fruit and veg a day.

And even if that were true, they're obviously not doing a very good job of restricting bad food intake given the UK's own obesity problems.

If the NHS were following everyone around, they'd have to be stuffing people full of low quality food to get the present outcome.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#137

Post by dalke »

hisham_hm wrote: post #127
at-fates-hands wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sad thing is you can do this for pretty much anything but water. 15.2 oz Minute Maid orange juice: 45g of sugar: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/subway-minute-maid... 12 oz Welchs grape juice? 63g of sugar: http://i2.wp.com/afterthekidsleave.files.wordpress.com/2014/... Something healthier like Vitamin Water - right? Vitamin Water - 8oz 13g: http://www.betteroffwell.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/vita..…

How about real fruit juice? Much healthier. Minute Maid is owned by Coca-Cola, anyways.

How is it "much healthier"? 8 ounces of real orange juice has 21 g of sugar and 110 calories. This is about what Minute Maid orange juice has.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#138

Post by mbell »

hisham_hm wrote: post #127
at-fates-hands wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sad thing is you can do this for pretty much anything but water. 15.2 oz Minute Maid orange juice: 45g of sugar: http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/subway-minute-maid... 12 oz Welchs grape juice? 63g of sugar: http://i2.wp.com/afterthekidsleave.files.wordpress.com/2014/... Something healthier like Vitamin Water - right? Vitamin Water - 8oz 13g: http://www.betteroffwell.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/vita..…

How about real fruit juice? Much healthier. Minute Maid is owned by Coca-Cola, anyways.

> How about real fruit juice? Much healthier.

Most fresh squeezed fruit juices have comparable levels of sugar to soda. They may have some extra vitamins but they are not terribly 'healthy'.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#139

Post by adventured »

caseysoftware wrote: post #104
austenallred wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd be curious to see how much of the decline of "soda" is a result of the move to "energy drinks"

I was thinking about that too but since they're sugared and carbonated, I assume they're often classified as soda too? (Not 100% sure there.)

They're not necessarily sugared in the sense of a regular Coke, but I'm not sure if they differentiate for the types. Monster, which has become a rather large company, sells a lot of their zero sugar / zero calorie products.

They moved to using erythritol. I drink the products and have yet to find any counter evidence erythritol isn't drastically superior to pretty much every other sweetener. It has been shown to be very safe (with studies spanning multiple decades now), very little of it is metabolized, and it doesn't cause the gastric reactions that competing products like xylitol do.

Re: The Decline of ‘Big Soda’

#140

Post by vinceguidry »

brandonmenc wrote: post #85
paulpauper wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

probably due to metabolism more so than activity

What am I missing here - exercise increases metabolism, at least temporarily, does it not?

Kids' bodies work differently than adults'. Most of their caloric intake goes to the vastly more demanding process of growing than it does to fueling activity. It's like how a mother gains a huge appetite during pregnancy that would have made her fat otherwise.

The problem is that habits formed as kids die hard. You keep eating the same way as you did when you were 12, but have nowhere to put it all, except your belly / thighs / butt. Before you know it you're 27 and huge.

Post reply on HN