Sweet Poison: Why Coca Cola Makes You Fat
David Gillespie has written an article that backs up what the few in Australia have been saying about Coca Cola Amatil's true intentions. The masters of deception and spin will have to increase marketing and advertising spend to brainwash Australians to think otherwise on the latest research slamming their sweet "black gold". Australian Sport and Coca Cola Amatil have proven to be a winning formula and when the truth gets a "workout" the sporting sponsorships get bigger.
So much for being educated when the Aussie mind is easily massaged. Coca Cola Amatil evolved from a tobacco company and now they are peddling alcoholic beverages to the Australian marketplace. With the current market power they have in Australia they will successfully make sure they profit handsomly now with the booze. Our Aussie kids now, drink more of the hard stuff than the USA kids, the cycle of cokes side of life into adult hood is all about sweet fat profits.
David Gillespie is a lawyer and author of Sweet Poison: Why Sugar Makes Us Fat (Penguin).
Extract via : news.com.au
"I can't swallow the line that a food whose only constituent (besides water) is sugar is entirely good for you".
Dr Rebecca Reeves, over at the Beverage Institute for Health & Wellness would no doubt take issue with my ill-informed ignorance. The nutrition expert wants a "randomised controlled trial that actually proves consuming softdrinks causes metabolic syndrome" before she signs on to the idea sugar makes you fat.
I'm sure the fact that the BIHW was established and funded by Coca-Cola has nothing to do with her perspectives.
Well, good news Dr Reeves, your friends over at PepsiCo have just paid for such a study to be done. The June 28 issue of New Scientist reports Peter Havel at the University of California persuaded 33 overweight and obese people to try a 10-week diet which was either 25 per cent fructose or 25 per cent glucose.
Fructose and glucose are the two building blocks of sugar. Previous work had observed sugar was very bad news. This experiment was about figuring out which bit was doing the damage in humans.
Those on the fructose diet ended up with more (1.5kg) tummy fat, higher fatty triglycerides (which leads to heart disease) and 20 per cent higher insulin resistance (which leads to Type II diabetes). None of this happened to the group on glucose.
Perhaps the result wasn't quite what PepsiCo was expecting because it clearly had to scratch around in the bottom of the marketing spin barrel to come up with this response:
"This is a very interesting and important study, but it does not reflect a real-world situation nor is it applicable to PepsiCo since pure fructose is not an ingredient in any of our food and beverage products".
A clear contender for this year's "every cloud has a silver lining" public relations award. Pity our digestive systems don't see things the same way as the folks at PepsiCo.
In a separate study, Havel's team looked at whether you needed to be eating "pure fructose" or merely something which contained it (like sugar). They compared the immediate effects of consuming meals containing equal quantities of sugar, pure fructose or pure glucose. Blood triglyceride levels were all elevated to a similar level 24 hours after consuming fructose and sugar, but not glucose. So it doesn't seem to matter whether you package fructose up as sugar or eat it uncut.
I don't see Dr Havel getting a gig at the BIHW anytime soon.