Health

eppur_se_muova

(36,289 posts) Fri Mar 9, 2012, 05:37 PM Mar 2012

Coke and Pepsi alter recipe to avoid cancer warning (BBC)

Coca-Cola and Pepsi are changing the recipes for their drinks to avoid being legally obliged to put a cancer warning label on the bottle.

The new recipe for caramel colouring in the drinks has less 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI) - a chemical which California has added to its list of carcinogens.

The change to the recipe has already been introduced in California but will be rolled out across the US.

Coca-Cola says there is no health risk to justify the change.

'No risk'

Spokeswoman Diana Garza-Ciarlante told the Associated Press news agency they wanted to ensure their products "would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning".
***
more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17308181

4 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Coke and Pepsi alter recipe to avoid cancer warning (BBC) (Original Post) eppur_se_muova Mar 2012 OP

They gave rats 1000x dosage Confusious Mar 2012 #1

Rats are less sensitive than humans ArcticFox Mar 2012 #2

So 500 sodas a day? Confusious Mar 2012 #3

Interesting backstory to all of this - truedelphi Mar 2012 #4

Confusious

(8,317 posts)

1. They gave rats 1000x dosage

Reply to eppur_se_muova (Original post)

Fri Mar 9, 2012, 05:48 PM

Mar 2012

You would need to drink 1000 cans of soda a day to have the same risk.

Anything is a risk when you take it to the extreme.

If you drank 1000x the recommended intake of water, you would die. Should we have warning labels on water now too?

ArcticFox

(1,249 posts)

2. Rats are less sensitive than humans

Reply to Confusious (Reply #1)

Fri Mar 9, 2012, 06:06 PM

Mar 2012

generally, to many things. Plus, rats don't have 30-60 years to develop cancer.

Confusious

(8,317 posts)

3. So 500 sodas a day?

Reply to ArcticFox (Reply #2)

Fri Mar 9, 2012, 10:38 PM

Mar 2012

for the rest of your life?

No, the same dosage that rats take is adjusted for humans, so 1000 cans a day.

"A spokesman for the Food and Drug Administration said the petition is being reviewed.

But he noted that a consumer would have to drink more than 1,000 cans a day to reach the doses administered that have shown links to cancer in rodents.

The American Beverage Association noted that California added the colouring to its list of carcinogens with no studies showing that it causes cancer in humans. It noted that the listing was based on a single study in lab mice and rats."

One study is NOT conclusive evidence.
Still ridiculous.

truedelphi

(32,324 posts)

4. Interesting backstory to all of this -

Reply to eppur_se_muova (Original post)

Thu Mar 15, 2012, 04:34 PM

Mar 2012

The California protocol that is forcing Coke and Pepsi to reduce, eliminate or label their 4-methylimidazole is called Prop 65.

Back in the 1980's, Prop 65 came about when Anti-pesticide and other activists decided that Corporate America could not be counted on to tell us what was good or bad. Activists were concerned about such products as various concoctions that are for sale to eat or be used as personal hair care items or lawn care. Or industrial chems we may be forced to work with.

It took several years, but finally the bill was passed. However the Big Chemical Corporations all figured out to avoid having such a protocol get adopted by other states.

It really would be nice if other states put this type of protocol through. But it would require even more work and larger numbers of people to do it.

Reply to this discussion