CSN Login
Members Online: 8

Reading Room: Are Coca-Cola and Pepsi Guilty?

lizzydavis's picture
lizzydavis
Posts: 893
Joined: May 2009

Are Coca-Cola and Pepsi Guilty?

Caramel Color in Soft Drinks May Cause Cancer

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) believes that the caramel color used in Coca-Cola and Pepsi could cause cancer, reports ABC News. Yet, the soft drink industry denies that caramel color is harmful. CSPI is requesting that the FDA ban certain types of caramel color in soft drinks and other foods. They say that their request is based on research completed years ago by the National Toxicology program, which found that a contaminant in caramel coloring caused cancer in mice and possibly rats. CSPI explains that caramel color isn't as innocent as it sounds. While pure caramel is made by heating sugar, the caramel color used in Pepsi and Coca-Cola is produced by reacting sugars with ammonia. CSPI says that the chemicals created by the reaction are proven carcinogens.

lisa42's picture
lisa42
Posts: 3663
Joined: Jul 2008

While I just said "wow" to myself as I was reading what you wrote, it actually really doesn't surprise me, sadly. It seems that a good half or more of what the general population consumes has something in it that is either carcinogenic or just really bad for our health in some way. And the manufacturers always deny and fight it, don't they? It hits them majorly in their wallets, and that always seems to be their first and foremost concern, over the health of the public.
Look at all the dyes in so many of our foods. I recently read that certain dyes get stored in our fat cells and stay there for many, many years. That's scary!
I would want to avoid them just based on that, but I have also known for years that I get itchy and sometimes hives when I consume yellow dye #5.
The high fructose corn syryp is in sooo many things- definitely a lot in all sodas/colas, and in many, many foods. Fortunately, some companies have been hearing the outcry against that, and have been substituing other things. Some will tell you right on the front that they use "real" sugar instead of high fructose corn syrup. Not that processed sugar is good either- quite the contrary- but I guess it isn't as bad as the high fructose corn syrup. At least some manufacturers are listening. Also, many stores even now including Wal-Mart, have non-gluten foods available and are having a few healthier choices to pick from on a certain aisle in their food section of the store now.
The caramel color is a new one that I hadn't heard, though. I guess we need the information disseminated from the health food stores and get into the mainstream newspapers/online news so the public will be aware. It would only be then, if there is a strong enough public outcry, that the manufacturers would do anything about it.
How many people who are Coke or Pepsi-holics, addicted to the sugar and caffeine, are going to stop drinking Coke or Pepsi based on this? I don't know- we need the strong public outcry and newspaper articles!!

Lisa

johnnybegood's picture
johnnybegood
Posts: 1122
Joined: Oct 2008

with all of that and would not be surprised if dr.pepper was one of them too.i used to drink diet dr. pepper a lot and i have heard a lot of people on this board used to be avid drinkers of the stuff.now i dont even hardly drink any kind of dark soda.thanks for the info...Godbless...johnnybegood

CherylHutch's picture
CherylHutch
Posts: 1399
Joined: Apr 2007

Any soda that has colour, in particular the dark colours, use the caramel colouring and have from the beginning of time. The only "sodas" that don't use it are your totally clear, non-coloured sodas.

But as Lisa said... it is not just the caramel colouring that is the problem. Like everything else, you would have to consume gallons of it per day for it to really be of concern. But add this to any store-bought food item that isn't a whole "fresh" food, then you are putting chemicals/pesticides/poisons in your food cycle.

To isolate one or two items is silly and won't help with any health concern if you eliminate them from your diet. Western diet is based on processed foods... for convenience, for laziness and for the taste we have become accustomed to, starting when we were children and that's what parents feed children. 30 years later, to say you are going to change your diet/tastes, good luck... chances are it will be a lot harder than just going to fresh produce markets, or organic meat farms. Your taste buds are now acclimatized to what you have grown up with... and yes, it is easy to change for the short term... but 97% of people who attempt will always fall back to that which they are used to... with every excuse in the book (the kids won't eat it, I have to prepare meals for me and meals for them, etc. etc)

So, yes, caramel colouring in sodas are not good for us. But then, neither is the corn syrup, or the extremely high salt content (especially in the colas), or the artificial sweeteners in the diet sodas... in other words, sodas are not healthy. So many say they will quit them... and instead of sodas go for fruit juices. They are just as bad because of the sugar/sweetener/salt content. So then you suggest organic, fresh squeezed or fresh juiced organic veggies/fruit juice... and those who have had a lifetime of sodas/commercial fruit juices now don't like the taste. They'll drink it for the short term because they know it's healthier, but most fail with sticking to them because they just don't like them... and back they go to their old ways.

The soda companies, etc. are not going to deviate far from their recipe. Why? The bottom dollar. Corn fructose is much much much cheaper than sugar and even more cheaper than organic raw sugar. If they used these products, your $1.50 bottle of coca cola would cost around the $5.00 mark... and no one is going to pay $5 for a bottle of coke when they can get one for under $2.

I think we can all agree... the "majority" of the public will talk the talk about eating more healthy until they realize just how expensive it is to eat healthy. If you are currently spending $100/week on your family's groceries, are you willing/able to spend $400/week for the same amount of groceries? When your kids/family are healthy now... are you willing to tell your kids they are going to have to eat foods they don't like so that they don't get sick? How many have the energy to fight with them over every meal? I feel it's just not feasible... and no matter what the intention, it's not doable for most families.

I grew up in a 2-parent family with 4 of us kids. A family of 6 where my father was the breadwinner, my mom was a stay-at-home mom and she had to make the grocery dollar stretch to feed her family of 4 growing kids. Back then, it was not unheard of to have high carb meals... white bread, mac and cheese, hot dogs, ground beef meals, the occasional chicken meal. Yes, she did try to serve veggies or a salad with dinner but none of us kids would eat it, nor would my father, so only she ate the fresh stuff. That was just the way it was in the 60s... and no one had the energy to fight with kids every meal and say you will sit there until you eat your salad.

Of the 6 of us, my mom who loved her fresh veggies is the only one who is not alive today... so really, how does one explain that to the kids of today? I don't think it's a generational problem... I think its a problem since the beginning of time... well, the beginning of when food has been prepared commercially.

Cheryl

scouty's picture
scouty
Posts: 1973
Joined: Apr 2004

of ANY kind with those that we eat today. In the 1960s, there was no such thing as all the pesticides, fertizers, and preservatives that were mostly introduced in the 1970s and 80s. That is why the cancer rates are sky high today compared to the 60s and 70s.

I have to disagree about taste buds and changes only lasting a short term. It depends on how much you really change and I can only go by what my experience was. My taste buds are completely different now then they were in 2004 and I know I can change them when I will give things a month or so. Kids are totally different since they eat so much crap at their schools

I don't think isolating and discontiuing one or two things is silly at all. As a matter of fact I think it may be easier to stop a few at a time to get a handle on things and then add a few more each week or so as your body and/or your bank account adjusts.

I stopped diet cokes, all bleached white flour products, and as many sugar "things" as I could the first week. I began juicing the same time. The following week, I cleaned out my cabinets and went all organic/natural but could only afford to add a little at a time.

My thinking at the time was just trying to take some of the stress off my body as I tried to boost it up to fight cancer. There was only so much I could control and foods were by far the easiest for me.

I have to add that I had stopped chemo while still having active cancer and was desperate. I wasn't ready to give up and decided to fight in a very different way.

CherylHutch's picture
CherylHutch
Posts: 1399
Joined: Apr 2007

Lisa... I am not arguing FOR foods that we have today at our disposal... but looking at the big picture. You and I are single and although I don't know how you stand financially, speaking on behalf of myself, I can afford the higher price organics, etc. But that would not be fair if I were to say, "Hey, if I can do it... everyone can!" because financially speaking, that is just not so.

As for habits/taste buds... again, I am not saying I know this from every single person/family who has tried this... I can only go by my experience, my own, as well as those around me. I have some diehard "organic" friends who swear that commercial processed foods will never touch their lips again. Some of them lasted a few months, some of them lasted a year, and yes, there were even some that were very strict and lasted a couple of years... but not one of them is still on it. They have all slipped... slowly at first and now are back to their old eating habits (I find this same pattern to be true of the majority of dieters... we all start out with the best intentions and have reasons why we want to change our way of eating). I was a diehard "low carber". Once I started on that diet, at first it was hard... cutting out all sugars, white carbs (bread being my downfall) and my favourite mashed potatoes with gravy. But I did and I found alternatives to my favourites. Nothing ever replaced the love of bread... but for mashed potatoes, I got very creative with cauliflower, and when you haven't had potatoes for a long time, it's amazing what you can do with cauliflower to get the same texture, etc. But I digress. I loved low carbing and felt fabulous while doing it. Of course I got all the naysayers telling me how unhealthy it was and that I should cut out all fat from the diet and eat only low-fat products (again, evil products of our society... the reason there is all this low fat diet food is because it is a huge money industry.... replacing fat with chemicals) basically thinking they should re-write my diet that was working so well for me and was all based on fresh, whole foods. In the end, I don't know if I just couldn't face one more naysayer, or if it was because I slipped and had some high carb food... whatever, I ended up off the low carb lifestyle. And I was (and still believe) one of the firm believers that that is the way we should be eating.

So, knowing I didn't/couldn't/whatever stick to it, I can't very well fault anyone else who starts off with good intentions and then falls back to the same old, same old.... and I find that is more common than those who are successful, change and stay changed for the rest of their lives. Of course there are success stories. You are one of the few (if not the only one) that I have known personally who has succeeded. There are also those who defy all odds and beat their cancer with no treatments. No reason or explanation for it, but there are those success stories.... did they do something to cause this or was it just the luck of the draw?

As for comparing 1960 foods. I wasn't comparing food item for food item... I was comparing the diet my mother had us four kids on. Kraft Dinner has not changed since 1960. It was commercial pasta with chemical "cheese sauce"... the very same recipe it is today. Nowadays, you can get different flavoured "cheese sauce"... all of them pure chemicals. We ate that 2-3 meals/week... be it dinner or lunch (dinner usually had the added mystery meat source... often cut up wieners). Ground beef was used in many creative ways... from Hamburger Helper (more chemicals) to meatloaf (homemade, so maybe that was one of our healthier meals) with mashed potatoes (no, not fresh potatoes, but Carnation Instant Potatoes). Of course, there were the usual hamburgers and hot dogs. Nowadays you can buy the frozen hamburger patties (who knows what chemicals are in them) but back in the 1960s Mom actually had to make the burger patties from scratch... so again, maybe more healthy. But no, the ground beef we got was far from organic... it was the cheapest ground beef one could find and preferably on sale (she would drive to a different store if it was on sale somewhere else). I'm not sure if they even had a lean ground beef back then, but even if they did, we didn't get it because it was cheaper to get the regular ground beef. Chicken was a real special meal. If/when we had it, it would be on a Sunday night... other times, a roast beef. But that would only be once or twice a month. The only time we would have fish would be in the summer if Dad would go out fishing with the "guys". He would come back with a couple of salmon and this was like Christmas... because we could have a salmon feast and freeze the rest. So in that sense... yes, any fish that were caught in the summer were fresh.

THAT was what I was comparing and using the 1960s for. THAT was how we ate and that was a very normal way to eat. Pretty much every family in the neighbourhood ate the same way. No one thought of it as poor eating habits... that was how you ate and weren't we all lucky to always have food on the table? Us kids were always amazed when we went to friends' houses and they had things like bought popsicles or individual ice cream bars. Those were a huge treat, one that we couldn't afford... so we loved going to friends' houses for them. We made our own popsicles at home with Kool Aid (sugar/chemicals). We didn't make popsicles out of fruit juice... fruit juice was too expensive. As for soda pop... we didn't get the brand names... way cheaper to buy those no-name brands where you could by crates of them for $2 or some very cheap price.

As we grew older and eventually were on our own... we still bought the foods we were used to and had been brought up on. As people became more and more aware of what "healthy eating" was, then yes, speaking for myself, I consciously tried to change certain habits. I cut way back on things like pasta and easy prep foods, adding more veggies (I still have a problem with fruit since we never had fruit growing up except for that which we picked ourselves when it was in season. I still fall back on comfort food, such as making a shepherd's pie... although I consciously choose a lean/organic ground beef to make it with. I am now actually a very good cook... but have I gone strictly organic, a diet heavy on fresh produce? No. And I would be lying if I said that I could change anytime I want because I know my tastebuds do not go with whatever I train them to. Been there, done that and have fallen off the wagon way too many times. I have eaten food and not enjoyed it, but knew it was good for me.

I don't have the responsibility to feed a family, and with the cost of food, I marvel at how parents do nowadays. But I would be very very surprised to hear that a family, used to the North American diet (such as it is) could financially and emotionally change just because intellectually we know it is better and more healthy for us.m That's my opinion... your mileage may vary.

Cheryl

thxmiker's picture
thxmiker
Posts: 1225
Joined: Oct 2010

My wife had severe allergies. We took her to an Allergist whom had her on shots for 10 years. The allergies subsided but never went away. I told her to start a diary of what she ate and maybe we could isolate a problem food. We started eating at home more and her allergies subsided. She read an article that said Soy is the 8th most common allergy.

Soy is in almost everything commercially produced! It is used as a flour, fat, MSG, and oil. Wally world's Milk and Butter have SOY added. (I always thought dairy came from cows, but not at Wally World.)

We stopped all boxed, and most canned food. If you check the international brands that are made in the USA a lot of them are chemical and soy free. We stopped all Fast Food, and all National Restaurants. We found a few Locally owned restaurants that made their own food. Within 6 months she lost 30lbs and 4 sizes. I lost 40lbs and 4 pant sizes! (I went from a tight 40 to a 35.)

We are even careful when joining friends for dinner at their homes. We ask politely to be careful about the soy. (Don't even get me started on High Fructose Corn Syrup!)

It is the best change we could have made for our health.

Best Always, mike

scouty's picture
scouty
Posts: 1973
Joined: Apr 2004

It's the reason why we have the highest rates of cancer, heart disease, type 2 diabetes, and obesity (just to name a few) of every other country in the entire world. We also spend 15 times more on prescription drugs then any other country. We are slowly killing ourselves just so some greedy SOBs can make money. It isn't about right or wrong anymore, it about making money and only about making money.

Only 2 countries import our meat and dairy products, Austrailia and Canada, and it isn't a coincidence that the colorectal cancer incidence rates are twice for the 3 of us then any other country!

I just read in Women's Health magazine that new studies are showing that pesticides are contributing to the obesity epidemic here since our bodies are so busy trying to get rid of the toxins, we can't metabolize foods correctly.

Watch out for the new name for High Fructose Corn Syrup, CORN SUGAR. The makers of HFCS have started the process to change the name. Apparently the consumption rates of HFCS had declined 15% in the last few years and they have figured out a way to get their market share back by changing the name of the product and confusing the public. My personal favorite of their commercials is one that says it is made from corn so it can't be bad for you. WELL so is moonshine but it isn't considered healthy.

If you really want to get scared, write down a few of the ingredient items of things that you can't pronounce from the labels of foods and look them up. Make sure you pick a few from bread so you can see what they use to keep it from molding so quickly (it's a sister of formaldehyde, that smelly stuff used to preserve those frogs we dissected in school).

I don't see the coke/pepsi news hitting the mainstream news or newspapers since so many are owned by major conglomerates with multiple business interest and sponsors, many feeding us the crap! The only way to change things is going to have to be with our pocketbooks. I've been organic, etc since 2004 now and I can really see a difference in selections and prices so we just need to keep it up.

In the meantime educate yourself!

Lisa P.

coloCan
Posts: 1850
Joined: Oct 2009

that have been unleashed upon an asleep-at-the-wheel public here, such as soy, beets and corn among other crops.Once this stuff enters the environment( and it already has), there is no going back......

lizzydavis's picture
lizzydavis
Posts: 893
Joined: May 2009

Thanks, Lisa for all the good information -

.....Watch out for the new name for High Fructose Corn Syrup, CORN SUGAR.

We learn something everyday.

Thanks again,
Lizzy

Buckwirth's picture
Buckwirth
Posts: 1272
Joined: Jun 2010

But there are other reasons for higher cancer rates.

Most prominently would be an aging population.

Here is the world breakdown:

Age structure

0-14 years: 27% (male 944,987,919/female 884,268,378) 
15-64 years: 65.3% (male 2,234,860,865/female 2,187,838,153) 
65 years and over: 7.6% (male 227,164,176/female 289,048,221) (2010 est.)

Median age

total: 28.4 years 
male: 27.7 years 
female: 29 years (2009 est.)

Here is the USA:

Age structure: 
0-14 years: 20.2% (male 31,639,127/female 30,305,704) 
15-64 years: 67% (male 102,665,043/female 103,129,321) 
65 years and over: 12.8% (male 16,901,232/female 22,571,696) (2010 est.)

Median age: 
total: 36.8 years 
male: 35.5 years 
female: 38.1 years (2010 est.)

So we are about 8 years older than "every other country", and 5% more of our population is over 65, and since much of cancer is age related we are bound to have a higher incidence rate than much of the world.

Are we the worst?  Here are the latest rankings:

All cancer rates by country - cases per 100,000 people
Country
Overall rate
SOURCE: WCRF.ORG
1 Denmark 326.1
2 Ireland 317  
3 Australia 314.1  
4 New Zealand 309.2  
5 Belgium 306.8
6 France (metropolitan) 300.4
7 USA 300.2  
8 Norway 299.1  
9 Canada 296.6  
10 Czech Republic 295

So it looks like we rank 7th, not first.

Now, is the death rate going up or down?

The following was written by Drew Haley and published on the singularity hub:

The annual report from the American Cancer Society shows that US cancer death rates continue to decline in both men and women. Since this trend began in the early 1990’s, over 767,000 cancer deaths have been avoided. Researchers claim that the decline in cancer-caused death is associated with early detection, better treatments, and reduced smoking rates.

Between 1991 and 2006, cancer death rates dropped 21% in men and 12.3% in women. Fewer people are getting cancer in the first place: the incidence of cancer has decreased 1.3% per year in men from 2000 to 2006, and 0.5% per year in women from 1998 to 2006.

Cancer is the second leading cause of death (after accident) for children under the age of 14. However, survival rates for pediatric cancer have drastically improved in the past few decades. A child diagnosed with cancer between 1975-1977 only had a 58% chance of surviving for five years. Between 1999 and 2005, that likelihood increased to 81%. As research is underway to unlock the genetic causes of pediatric cancer, there is good reason to expect that incidence rates will decline in future years as well.

Many of these trends are the consequences of policy and healthcare shifts that took place decades ago. Some of the most exciting research on cancer is being done today: new treatments are not only treating existent tumors, but preparing the immune system to fight cancer before it starts. We’ve reported on the new BiovaxID vaccine for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, as well as gene therapy that teaches the immune system to fight melanoma (and can be watched in real time). The new drug Crizotinib is being used to inhibit genetic mutations in lung cancer patients, which has been effective in 90% of patients.

Back to my voice.  

Just wanted to make sure some facts were added into this debate.

pete43lost_at_sea's picture
pete43lost_at_sea
Posts: 3915
Joined: Nov 2010

and of course food is a very big part of the equation.

but why do family buy macdonalds because they are wornout and time poor.

why are they time poor ? need money to pay rent/mortgage etc etc and all the modern junk we can happily live without.

we have freedom to direct our lives but i see clever marketing guys pulling the strings.

who has the highest death rate, lets just find the healthiest society on the planet and maybe we could open our minds and learn from them. i suggest their lifestyles will not ressemble modern western life as we know it.

we have the power of choice but so few use it.

thanks for the post,

Peter

Lifeisajourney
Posts: 217
Joined: Apr 2010

coke addicted. When my kids were little, Drs use to say if they had nausea, let coke or seven up sit out open and give them some warm after awhile to help stomach......to this day I say coke helps my nausea, of course I have colon cancer...., the whole food chain scares me....Just a comment....Pat

tesslee's picture
tesslee
Posts: 97
Joined: Apr 2010

too. damages our bones.

PhillieG's picture
PhillieG
Posts: 4672
Joined: May 2005

Soon our water won't be safe either. They want to start hydro-fracking in the Catskill Mountains in NY State. This is some of the best water on the planet and it supplies NYC with most of their drinking water. The only thing is that "they" can get natural gas out of the shale by setting off explosives that cause mini-earthquakes. That all releases the gas. Then they pump in a toxic liquid down into the ground which forces the gas to the top. One problem is that there are known carcinogens in the fluid they use and also, it's proprietary which means that like coca-cola, they do not have to divulge exactly what is in there. Some people can actually light their faucets and it's like a flamethrower. This affects people with wells and it would affect the water that NYC gets. They already do this in 16(?) states and it's growing. There is a documentary called "GASLAND" that talks about it.

We may have to drink our scotch straight up!
Not good...

angelsbaby's picture
angelsbaby
Posts: 1161
Joined: May 2008

thats all i drink go figure there was something about diet sodas to i drink diet coke i am cutting down abit trying to drink more water.

michelle

scouty's picture
scouty
Posts: 1973
Joined: Apr 2004

that is sweetened with stevia (a plant) that does not spike your blood sugar. I really like it and it isn't bad for you!

lizzydavis's picture
lizzydavis
Posts: 893
Joined: May 2009

Lisa, which brand vitamin water zero? Thanks.

scouty's picture
scouty
Posts: 1973
Joined: Apr 2004

But be sure and get the zero ones with zero calories to avoid sugar and artificial sweeteners. The others have calories and sugar but not as much as gatorade and some of the others. They use cane sugar, not HFCS.

Buckwirth's picture
Buckwirth
Posts: 1272
Joined: Jun 2010

But three European countries have higher rates of cancer, and don't use HFCS as a sweetener.

Buckwirth's picture
Buckwirth
Posts: 1272
Joined: Jun 2010

Is also a plant. I would not recommend it in your salad.

Natural does not equal safe.

CherylHutch's picture
CherylHutch
Posts: 1399
Joined: Apr 2007

Hey Lisa... just out of curiosity... do you use the white stevia or the green? The reason I ask, most health food stores up here sell the white and I just assumed that stevia, when dried, etc. produced a white powder and that's how I used to buy it. Friends of mine own an organic farm where they produce their own organic alfalfa, stevia and olive plants... and it was from them that I learned about stevia is a green plant but commercial manufacturers bleach the powder so it resembles other sweeteners which the public is more apt to buy.

You can read about it here... needless to say, my next order I'm going to be putting in for the green stevia:

All about Stevia

Of course, for those who have been following healthy trends, there has been a lot written about having an alkaline body because cancer can't survive in an alkaline environment. Because of our Western diets, our bodies tend to be very acidic... and cancer thrives on that environment. I don't know enough about it to have an opinion one way or the other... but I figure, it probably wouldn't hurt to have a more alkaline body, whether it affects the cancer or not. Sooooo, that is why I'm about to put in an order to my friends (their farm is about a 5 hour drive from Vancouver, hence I'll get them to mail it to me) for the alfalfa and stevia. Here's a bit more about an alkaline body:

Alfalfa benefits

You can also read about the benefits for organic Olive Leaves as well on the website, if anyone is interested.

Cheryl

lizzydavis's picture
lizzydavis
Posts: 893
Joined: May 2009

Phil - Thanks for the laugh!

Sundanceh's picture
Sundanceh
Posts: 4298
Joined: Jun 2009

In fact, our water is already not safe enough...recent report reveals that 31 major cities in the US have revealed a new chemical that was found - it promotes stomach cancer.

And most bottled water is only a glorified version of tap water - it's portability thru plastic revolutioned water and made it hip to carry around. More people probably drink more water as a result, but who knows what is really safe anymore?

As far the natuaral gas goes, well here in Texas, they are all over everywhere. It's not been a good thing....the residents don't see a dime of any royalty money, yet the wells are all over the metroplex, right in the middle of hundreds of thousands of people.

We've had mild earthquakes in a town about 50 miles from me...the result of the fracturing as you mention. And the waster water they are pumping into the ground - how can that not affect the water table below?

And let's don't mention the toxic BENZINE that they are releaing into the atmosphere - and under the cover of night where it cannot be detected. Although news investigations did get infra red cameras to detect the gas wells being "vented" at night this toxic chemical. Air is not as good here anymore, sinus and congestion problems on the rise etc.

So much of what we breathe, drink, and eat, does us more harm than good....it's so perplexing that I'm getting to the point where everything I look at is a reminder that it could cause cancer - that's no way to live, but is live in the present as we know it.

I had a nurse who told me point blank, "We live in a world of cancer now that did not exist 30 years ago."

I agree...seems like the only defense is to have our bodies be strong enough to fight off the many predators that seek to harm it.

-Craig

CherylHutch's picture
CherylHutch
Posts: 1399
Joined: Apr 2007

Ok Phil... that's enough out of you!! I was reading your post and tsk tsk tsking away... when I read your last line... Not good... And for some reason that struck me so funny that I did laugh out loud! This is not good... you are not suppose to be making me laugh

But thanks anyways :D

Cheryl

tootsie1's picture
tootsie1
Posts: 5006
Joined: Feb 2008

Thank goodness I prefer tea!

*hugs*
Gail

CherylHutch's picture
CherylHutch
Posts: 1399
Joined: Apr 2007

Hehehe Gail! But Tea actually has more caffeine than coffee... and of course you have to make tea with water.... and it seems some water supplies are going to be contaminated, so you may be in big doo-doo too

Cheryl

Sonia32's picture
Sonia32
Posts: 1068
Joined: Mar 2009

I just wonder if some of them are bad.

Hugs
Sonia

coloCan
Posts: 1850
Joined: Oct 2009

"air fresheners sold in US for example,have chemical ingredients that are harmful to your lungs. Try pronouncing the names of some of the items listed on labels of household products (orin some processed "foods" for that matter)

PS: today's email from Dr Mercola's site has a listing of the most commonly used food colorings here (mercola.com)

SisterSledge's picture
SisterSledge
Posts: 342
Joined: Feb 2011

In adulthood, I've always tried to eat well by following a plan of diversity and moderation as my general rules. Thus, there is very little that I actually cut completely from my diet...I just enjoy it moderately. Most of my meals are made of of diverse veggies and things made from scratch. Quality ingredients, local and organic when available and affordable. I have a huge garden and preserve as much as I can to carry us through.

I think avoiding artificial coloring, sweeteners, processed foods full of chemicals and pesticides is key to good health...that and moderation.
Janine

pete43lost_at_sea's picture
pete43lost_at_sea
Posts: 3915
Joined: Nov 2010

i have not had diet coke for 8 months since dx.

i had way too much over the last decade.

i know its not proven cause and effect, but its a real worry.

thanks for posting this info,

Pete

Sundanceh's picture
Sundanceh
Posts: 4298
Joined: Jun 2009

Pete

Diet sodas contain ASPARTANE - which results directly in liver cancer. So, there are harms with diet drinks.

Just an Fyi...Craig

scouty's picture
scouty
Posts: 1973
Joined: Apr 2004

I never liked coffee so I drank coke and then diet coke for caffeine. Depending on what was going on at work I had am many as 6 a day! One of many things I did that made my body make cancer feel comfortable.

I haven't had one in 6 years and 4 months! My withdrawal headaches were so intense I couldn't read or watch TV for 2-3 days. That in itself scared me enough to never want one again.

Lisa P.

CherylHutch's picture
CherylHutch
Posts: 1399
Joined: Apr 2007

I was never a Coca-Cola (regular) addict... I found it too syrupy and sweet. BUT, I was totally addicted to Diet Coke, full caffeine!! I also fell for the marketing... 0 calories, sweetener not sugar! Gee, it was almost like a free ticket to drink as much as you wanted. Back then (when I was soooo addicted) I didn't think about the consequences of artificial sweetener... let's face it, the diet industry had drilled it into us that Sugar = BAD, artificial sweetener = GOOD. But it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out... other than the lack of calories, what could possibly be good about artificial sweetener? It's all chemicals... there's no such thing as an artificial sweetener tree or bush ;)

Over time, not because I became smarter... I just started weaning myself off. I'm not completely off. Because I'm not a big drinker of alcohol (the occasional glass of wine, but that's about it... especially since I'm usually driving)... so, I will usually have a diet soft drink rather than an alcoholic drink. Of course, now they have confirmed that a glass of wine/day is actually GOOD for you, so I guess I better start working on drinking wine again ;)

Cheryl

lizzydavis's picture
lizzydavis
Posts: 893
Joined: May 2009

Have you heard of Zevia? I have never tried it but a friend said it looks ok if you can afford the price. He said they sell it at Whole Foods.

ZEVIA INFORMATION
ZEVIA, pronounced zē-vē-ah, was the first and remains the best tasting 100% natural, zero calorie soda.

With only the purest ingredients, ZEVIA contains none of the chemically processed artificial sugar substitutes, artificial colors, flavors or preservatives found in other diet sodas. ZEVIA is 100% natural, has zero calories, zero net carbs, zero fat, and little or no sodium (depending on flavor).

All seven delicious ZEVIA varieties – Cola, Ginger Root Beer, Dr. Zevia, Twist, Ginger Ale, Black Cherry and Orange – are more delicious and better for you than any other diet soda. Click here for all natural ingredients information and to learn more about the history and science of stevia.

Have you tried it?

Subscribe with RSS
About Cancer Society

The content on this site is for informational purposes only. It is not a substitute for professional medical advice. Do not use this information to diagnose or treat a health problem or disease without consulting with a qualified healthcare provider. Please consult your healthcare provider with any questions or concerns you may have regarding your condition. Use of this online service is subject to the disclaimer and the terms and conditions.

Copyright 2000-2014 © Cancer Survivors Network