Will drinking a glass of cold, sparkling soda be soon the equivalent of smoking: you are a social pariah in the eyes of many, whilst providing a source of income for the producer and taxing government alike? You might not be able to draw a direct comparison since you are less likely to be hooked with an occasional glass of Coca-Cola, yet becoming a regular “hooked” consumer can have its side effects. There’s a whole world of soda politics that you possibly had never imagined.
This is an interesting book that looks, without recourse to hysteria or hyperbole, at the world of soda drinks, the role they play in our society and their real downside as these products contribute to poor dental hygiene, higher calorie intake, obesity and type-2 diabetes. Clearly a glass won’t harm you, but several glasses a day or more?
The author takes a forensic look at how the soda drinks industry works to get us hooked. Advertising is heavily used to make drinking soda seem normal, as normal as drinking a glass of milk or water. Would your football stadium hot dog be the same with a glass of water? What about a visit to the cinema, if you took milk with your over-priced popcorn? Carrot juice to accompany your hamburger at a fast-food joint?
Even after any health issues that can follow there is a dark side. Why would the soda drinks industry be pumping large amounts of money to lobby against changes that could impact on their bottom line? They may shout loudly about their ethical policies and corporate social responsibility, whilst shovelling money at lobbyists to head off initiatives that might stop their products being marketed towards the most vulnerable (children) in places where they gather such as schools or cinemas.
The author carefully comes out with her arguments. It is not a quick “all soda is bad” rant. Measured change is possible. Nobody is suggesting that all sodas should be banned, yet they are relatively cheap to produce and sold at a high profit. Alternative formulations and ingredients could be used to offer a more healthy soda, ideal for consumption in moderation, but that costs; both in terms of direct profit and potential sales. No wonder there’s a lack of demand to change things?
There is change but it does not come from “Big Soda”. The author notes, talking about public advocacy and campaigning: “…sodas are, in public health jargon, ‘low hanging fruit’ – easy targets. They contain sugars but nothing else of redeeming nutritional value. This explains in part why sodas are an example of successful advocacy. Soda consumption is falling. Americans are not buying Coke and Pepsi the way they used to, and are only partially replacing them with other sugary drinks. This did not happen accidentally. As any soda company executive will tell you, health advocacy has become the single greatest threat to company profits.” Yet this is not being replicated worldwide and the pace of change is slow. Maybe a wise company would seize this tidal wave and change course whilst it can. Corporate intransigency, on the other hand…
Think what you pay for your soda, take a typical 12 ounce serving (circa 330ml for those who use metric). The author mentions how a drink is made and the role ice has, before giving some stunning figures: “Ice performs four critical functions: it chills the drink, improves the taste, dilutes the ingredients, and reduces the retailer’s cost. If you pack ice to the brim, less than half the volume of your drink comes from the soda mix. Once ice is added, these ingredients are so diluted that the final cost of fountain drinks to the seller – including the cup, lid, and straw – comes to just over one cent per ounce. This explains why many places are so generous with free refills. Even though refills usually have less ice than the initial drink and end up costing the seller more, they are still highly profitable. Convenience stores, restaurants, sports facilities, and movie theatres make so much money on fountain sodas that they can well be generous: a typical return is more than 80 cents on the dollar.”
It can get worse, notes the author: “The larger the soda, the more sugar and calories it contains even if diluted with ice. But larger sizes do more than that. First, they encourage greater consumption. Researchers find people to consume more from large containers than small ones, even when they leave some behind. Second, large portions are confusing. People given larger servings tend to underestimate how much they are eating to a much greater extent than when given smaller portions. Smaller sugary drinks are healthier for three reasons: they provide less sugar and fewer calories. They discourage excessive intake. And they promote more realistic estimates of the amounts consumed.”
This reviewer likes a soda as must as the next person and even though you know the calorie count and have read the nutritional differences between a regular and light product it can be hard to change. Seeing the size of some of the drinks containers on sale at cinemas leads you to boggle. Sometimes one even struggles to finish the regular drink at a hamburger restaurant and who wants to take a few mouthfuls home; the obvious solution is to leave it, yet how many take the common route of “finishing it off” with a few gulps… tick, tick, tick goes the calorie counter…
One cannot add much more. There are two sides to every argument and the author notes this, witness the mass of reading notes, bibliography and deep index. If you really disbelieve a point, the author openly shows where she got the information from and you can follow the chain back and review matters.
For this reader, at least, it was fascinating, essential reading. Maybe it won’t change his limited soda intake but it sure won’t expand it!
Autamme.com