Trump just convinced Coca-Cola to use real sugar in domestic Coke!
-
@sunsunsun Haidut has said that there is still starch content in HFCS if it hasn't been filtered properly and Ray has said it may be contaminated with heavy metals. https://bioenergetic.life/clips/75d75?t=1184&c=24
Judging by this, I think the only real issue with HFCS seems to be that it MIGHT be contaminated and I guess you don't really know for sure unless you have your own lab to test it.
-
We will see. There's a lot of promises that never come to fruition.
But it would be great. This Mexicola is pricy where I live. -
@Milk-Destroyer haidut is referencing peat's assertion which I think has been proven to be based on a retracted study.
I looked up the mercury claims and it seems like the amounts in it are of no concern. That sounds like a reddit take but apparently normal drinking water has more than soda. This is from reddit:
"You give me a good enough meter and I'll find mercury in every single food (natural or otherwise) on the face of the planet. When fish has mercury levels in the PPM, I don't think you really need to worry about your soda having mercury in the PPT range. The difference between the mercury content in a can of tuna and the mercury content in a can of coke is 4 orders of magnitude. You would have to drink over 1000 cans of coke to get the same amount of mercury you'd get from a can of tuna."
-
@LucH everything you said applies to sucrose
-
Aren't they unbonded in HFCS, and maybe something enantiomer related with fructose compounds a distinct effect. I don't have a claim though, I'll drink an HFCS coke. Maybe hold the aspartame.
-
@LucH said in Trump just convinced Coca-Cola to use real sugar in domestic Coke!:
Note: Fructose is taken up and metabolized almost entirely by the liver, when HD fructose comes in once, whereas the majority of an oral glucose load escapes the liver to be metabolized in peripheral tissues when required (physical expenditures).
2 birds, 1 abstract and inconvenient stone.
https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/2319/glucose-loading-cures-everything
https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/6764/what-s-the-consensus-on-vitamin-a-in-our-community -
Yeah apparently, for those who hadn’t heard, Ray said both types of Coke work metabolically. It’s just that taste-wise he preferred the Mexican one:
Post in thread 'Ray Peat Email Advice Depository'
https://lowtoxinforum.com/threads/ray-peat-email-advice-depository.1035/post-9714Q:Someone told me you drink HFCS coke regularly? do you think it is not
that harmful if someone is healthy?
A:I prefer Mexican coke with real sugar (it tastes very different), but metabolically there isn't much difference. -
I believe if it tastes better it is better. Taste is the bodies judge of nutritional quality.
-
Apparently this is, as they say, "fake news," but I hope that it becomes real news
-
This post is deleted! -
@sunsunsun said in Trump just convinced Coca-Cola to use real sugar in domestic Coke!:
@16characterstwas the study ray referenced on HFCS being somehow higher in calories got retracted IIRC and a follow up study IIRC determined it was just a measurement/lab error.
so what's the problem with HFCS, really? seems like it was a non-issue from the start. I don't even think twice when I get HFCS drinks and when brands advertise they are HFCS free I really dont care.
Getting all the deep fryers in McDonald's switched over to high-oleic sunflower would have been reasonable and probably made more market sense than promoting beef tallow. ofc guys like RFK and etc probably aren't even aware of this product and how the option makes sense, and would be an easy switch over (liquid at room temp and the fields that grow canola or sunflower currently could just switch to the seed stock for high-oleic varieties, and would improve the health of anyone who eats the deep-fried foods.
Didn’t know about that retraction. Good to hear.
Yeah ‘know what you mean. Just as Peat used to, I drink both types (he said metabolically they both do the job), and like him I enjoy the taste of the Mexican one with sugar more. (‘will try to find the email where he said that.)
Good idea about the oils. If it costs the same, or not too much more, maybe at some point they'll switch hopefully. (It would help if more consumers understood they’d be paying for a better product.) ‘Would be a step in the right direction.
-
@happyhanneke said in Trump just convinced Coca-Cola to use real sugar in domestic Coke!:
But it would be great. This Mexicola is pricy where I live.
As others have said, the tariff issue makes this move look bad. Not everyone drinks Coke, so it's a sort of silly bargain. It would be neat to see soft drinks and sweets prioritizing sugar.
Furthermore... why can't we just re-grow sugar-cane in the South? Not to be too nationalist, but couldn't HFCS or the raw material be exported to make up for an industry switcharoo?
Mexicola is $2 per 12 oz bottle or about $7 for 4.
Regular coke is $2.30 for 24 oz, so Mex is about double the price. Also - I think Tijuana bottled Coke tastes better than Monterrey. Where is their water sourced?
