

Too much cola zaps muscle power  - rams
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8056028.stm

======
azanar
From the responses I've seen so far, my reflection is as follows:

You can moderate your behavior to reasonably mitigate the possible risks of
certain substances as much as you feel is prudent give the relative certainty
and severity of the risks;

Or you can develop an ill-informed, hyperbolic, almost knee-jerk reaction to
the risks and cast aspersions toward the people who shrug and either suggest
all things in moderation, or suggest the risks aren't _that_ high. It is not
obvious to me that these people are either irresponsible or brain-damaged. It
is just as possible they performed a rational risk assessment and arrived at a
different conclusion. It's something to be discussed, not to be worked up into
a religious fervor over.

For example, from the comments herein, diet colas do not promote tooth decay,
nor do they promote diabetes. In fact, they are considered safe for diabetic
people to drink. They contain no sucrose, nor any HFCS. They contain
aspartame, an alternative sweetener with entirely different properties. They
contain carbonated water, but as I cited elsewhere, carbonated water is not
_that_ conducive to tooth decay.

The study isn't even conclusive yet, and the article hedges this by saying it
_can_ cause muscle weakness, not that it _will_. The article mentions two
people, and declare that the results can be generalized, because the
investigators believe they can. They present this along with some scary
statistics to assure us that, if the results can be generalized, we're all in
peril.

2-3 liters sounds like a lot, but it is only because we've assumed _a priori_
the certain risk of ingesting these substances, and declare the only proper
amount for assuring ones health is 0 liters per day, with no variance. If the
average were half that, aspersions would likely still be cast.

Can we please be more reasonable about this?

------
mdasen
_there is very little doubt that tens of millions of people in industrialised
countries drink at least 2-3 l of cola per day_

Wow. I was worried that 40oz might be rotting my body, but 2-3 liters is a lot
of soda. Overuse of most products will have poor health effects.

~~~
mrtron
1.2 Billion+ servings (8oz) of Coke are sold daily.

That is a staggering volume, and apparently there is a very sizable population
of individuals who are heavy users.

------
pkrumins
How brain damaged do you have to be to drink even a liter of cola per day?

~~~
msluyter
I'm pretty brain damaged I guess. I must drink at least a 3 liter bottle of
diet Coke a day, probably more. I've tried stopping at various times and it's
not easy; it's a somewhat more serious addiction than a lot of people might
believe, imho. The best luck I've had was with drinking coffee for the
caffeine and club soda for the bubbly sensation (not simultaneously), and I
managed to get away from it for a month, but I've since lapsed. Will try again
upon reading this article.

~~~
berntb
I personally quit when I got too much teeth problems.

You might want to quit carbonated and sugared drinks before you get that
incentive...

~~~
azanar
Diet sodas contain aspartame, which does not promote tooth decay. A google
search will produce a number of results, with varying degrees of motivation to
market aspartame, all saying pretty much the same thing.

For carbonated beverages in general, the concern appears to be more about the
acids in the substance than in the carbonation, at least as my limited
research suggests. Some of these same acids occur in a variety of other foods
as well (citric acid in citrus fruits, for instance.) Others, like phosphoric
acid, which has been correlated to decreased bone density in some studies, are
only in certain soft drinks. Even then, the risk is not certain.

Carbonation, on it's own produces very little relative tooth decay (Source:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbonated_water#Health_effects>).

There may be other concerns worth voicing, but these seem marginal.

~~~
Shooter
I wish there was a low/no calorie sweetener that was actually safe to use.
Aspartame is a carcinogen, as are most other artificial sweeteners...even
Splenda contains chlorine. Aspartame also gives me migraines, so I generally
stick with cane sugar or honey. Stevia, xylitol, and erythyritol have many
positives, but they're pricey and often have a bad aftertaste and/or laxative
effect. I'm addicted to sweet tea, but I'm trying to reduce my sugar
consumption. White and green tea and fruit spritzers are the only alternatives
I've found that work for me...black tea just makes me crave sugar.

~~~
silentbicycle
Municipal tap water often has chlorine, too. I'm not sure how much, and water
varies from city to city, but there's often enough to affect bread rising, so
it's not a completely trivial amount. At the same time, anything that _gets
added to tap water_ (to discourage micro-organisms, which of course includes
yeast) is probably reasonably harmless in small quantities.

As sweeteners (both artificial and real) go, I doubt there's going to be a
clear view of their pros and cons in the near future -- there's way, _way_ too
much money involved. (I like honey and vanilla sugar, but try to not use too
much.)

------
lionheart
The problem seems to be the fructose, corn syrup, and caffeine, not the actual
"soda."

I drink a brand called Diet Rite which is made with Splenda and has no
caffeine or sodium. And, actually, I honestly like the taste of it better than
Coke or Pepsi.

I think something like that is fine and if the other soda companies switched
to healthier ingredients they would be fine too.

~~~
lsb
If you take all out the HFCS and caffeine, you have (mostly) flavored seltzer.

------
lsb
Garbage in, garbage out.

Why not just drink water, instead of Brawndo?

~~~
jraines
Because Brawndo's got what programmers crave; it's got electrolytes!

Hmm . . . maybe I just proved your point. All I've had to drink today is
coffee and Red Bull.

~~~
silentbicycle
When I see cans of Java Monster (an energy drink), I picture some junior
programmer on an all-nighter, all hopped up on caffeine and copy-and-pasting
more code than most people produce in a year. _"Oh no! Our codebase got hit by
a Java Monster last night!"_

------
embeddedradical
He's talking about approximately 5 cans/day (2 liters/day).

Full text of article is here:
[http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121402091/abstrac...](http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121402091/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0)

i have no access to the details (would have to pay, not a student with a univ
license or anything...), so if someone does have access - it'd be nice to know
at which amount in this study one transitions from 'moderate' to 'heavy.' 5 is
apparently heavy, but where is 2 cans?

~~~
mattyb
This linked worked for me: [http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-
bin/fulltext/12238435...](http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-
bin/fulltext/122384352/PDFSTART)

Edit: not quite, that's just the IJCP summary. The actual study is behind a
paywall here: [http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-
bin/fulltext/12238434...](http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-
bin/fulltext/122384349/PDFSTART)

------
CalmQuiet
same bbc story (maybe one is "printable" format) week ago:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=616639>

My same disappointment with the "journalistic" coverage applies now:

They don't seem to differentiate colas from other sodas. A surprise to me,
since I seem to recall hearing the high phosphorous content of colas can
compete with some other mineral absorption (calcium, was it?) ...maybe compete
with potassium?

Personally, I've felt better about my physical stamina when I surrender to my
crave for a "fizzling" drink by going to some diet lemon-lime (no caffeine or
sugar) rather than a "cola" (whether caffeinated or sugared). YMMV

------
RiderOfGiraffes
See also <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=616639> posted a week ago.

