Clydesdales/Athenas (200+ lb / 91+ kg) - "Coke Didn't Make America Fat"

From The Wall Street Journal, interesting reading from the CEO of Coca-Cola:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574455464120581696.html

I do not know about America but as a guy who's been a heavy Cola drinker(2 l - half a gallon a day) for about 20 years (I am just 28) I know for sure it did it's share.
Since giving it up (exactly 1 month ago) I lost 12kg( 25 pounds )(combined with Montignac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montignac_diet) diet).
For the record I live in Romania where there are far less fat/obese people but after the introduction of Coca-Cola/Pepsi drinks(20 years ago) the percentage started to increase.
Of course the CEO of Coca-Cola might argue that you might drink Light or Zero Cola but I don't buy it after seeing the effects of giving up Cola on my own body.

I have to add that I could not have lost that much weight without bike commuting 500km/month ~300 miles a month (which helped me relax a lot and reduced the stress level besides intensifying my metabolism).
I hope I can get back to drinking it(very small quantities - like tequila :) ) once I get to about 180 pounds (I am still way too heavy at 235 pounds).
PS : As a software developer you are almost expected to drink Cola or Pepsi :).

Now I want a coke :(

But that is besides the point. :) It is 9am and I'm grogy, I need it more for the caffeine than the calories.

I agree with him. If we get off our couch/recliners and do stuff, we'd burn alot more calories in a day. Even at home when the vacuum and cleaning went in the direction of lighter and easier, we started working less. You can't go after an industry and tax people into making the right decision, people have to change their lifestyles and want to change.

I ride my bike so I can eat my junk and not feel too bad about it.....:p

Interesting. I too am a long time moderately heavy consumer of Pepsi. (6-8 12 oz cans a day x30 years) I am certain my weight is a direct result of drinking too much Pepsi. But I also had other factors, like lack of exercise and eating too much.

The interesting part is after 1 month of NO Pepsi, I've lost 20#. Since then I've been reading food labels like crazy and making sure there is no HFCS (High Fructose Corn Syrup) in anything I am consuming.

So however a CEO of xyz soda company chooses to rationalize it, they are responsible for part of the equation. Of course they will NEVER admit any perceived wrong doing for fear of eroding profits that could possibly impact their multimillion dollar vacation house.

The rest of that equation IS all about us and our habits, like it or not.

If soda didn't make you thirsty, or at least me and everyone I know thirsty, when you drank it then he might have a point. Problem is it isn't filling and you could really just keep chugging it nearly endlessly.
It isn't alone in that though. I used to eat an angel food cake on break when I worked at the grocery. Didn't seem to fill me at all but it tasted good along with a 32oz of mountain dew. Neither of which I should have ever been eating or drinking but at the time I was 120lbs and couldn't gain an ounce no matter what.

I *was* a life long diet coke drinker. I was raised on the stuff. Regular coke was some kind of evil beverage way too high in calories for mere mortals to consume in our household. And for the most part, to some degree or another- everybody in my family was fat.

When I got serious about lifestyle modification, I looked around and noticed something weird. Fat people drank diet coke, skinny people drank regular coke. Of course, this is a generalization, and rather anecdotal, but hey- when in Rome...

So yeah, for the most part, I'm pretty much a coffee/water/beer guy, but when I do go for pop, it's usually chock full of corn syrupy goodness now. I still can't get over that little panic attack over the first sip though "OHMYGODWHATAREYOUDOINGYOULLGETFAT!!!". I just have to remind myself, I *was* fat- drinking regular pop had no hand in it.

Nutrasweet/Spenda pure evil...

I wont consume it and neither will my children... it has given my mother health problems... that go away when she stops drinking it... but she is so addicted to it and the 'idea' that regular soda makes you fat... yet she has struggled with her weight after having kids but before diet soda she was bean pole skinny... hmmmmmmm

I agree Coke didn't single-highhandedly do it... there are many factors... just as well blame TV if anything...

PS why is there salt in your diet soda? salt makes you retain water... oh wait it makes you thirstier... so you want more diet soda...

I hope I can get back to drinking it(very small quantities - like tequila :) ) once I get to about 180 pounds (I am still way too heavy at 235 pounds).
PS : As a software developer you are almost expected to drink Cola or Pepsi :).

I'd give up on that idea. I got off a 4 litre a day Pepsi habit a couple of years ago. I did it by slowly thinning out the Pepsi with seltzer, changing the recipe every week till it was pure seltzer. But each week it'd be a new withdrawl, less severe than cold turkey though.

When I have to, I'll have a sprite or other clear soda, but its only a couple of times a year. But underlying the craving for Pepsi was also a craving for sugar. A battle I'm still waging.

However, I discovered that what I really liked best about Pepsi, was the carbonation and the coldness. Seltzer has both of these, so I still treat myself to it.

High Fructose Corn Syrup will make you fat.. This one small ingredient which is in a lot of foods and beverages is going to be the bane of Americans..

Corn is the largest contributor to the general increase in fatness over the past few years.

I have a large collection of historic photographs of groups of everyday people going back over the past 80 years and it looks like every is inflated with an air hose.

Corn - industrialized production of beef and chicken and the high frustose corn syrop. It is the corn that has made coke ad pepsi so cheap.

Also - the dramatically cheap energy: oil, electricity, et al. - do not help.

It isn't necessarily that soda with HFCS makes one fat, or that diet soda with artificial sweeteners makes one fat. I believe that the volumes are more likely to blame than the actual ingredients.
Who's the industry pioneer that decided 40oz is an acceptable size for a soft drink? I enjoy a normal 12oz can of Coke during a long brevet when I have my lunch break. It's about 145 calories for a 12oz can... Or 483 calories in a 40oz bucket! For the sake of argument, let's just round it up to 500 and say somebody nurses 1 of those monsters a day, every day. That's ~3500 calories/week.
Do the math: If you don't do anything to balance it out, that's over just over 50 pounds a year which can be gained.

It isn't necessarily that soda with HFCS makes one fat, or that diet soda with artificial sweeteners makes one fat. I believe that the volumes are more likely to blame than the actual ingredients.
Who's the industry pioneer that decided 40oz is an acceptable size for a soft drink? I enjoy a normal 12oz can of Coke during a long brevet when I have my lunch break. It's about 145 calories for a 12oz can... Or 483 calories in a 40oz bucket! For the sake of argument, let's just round it up to 500 and say somebody nurses 1 of those monsters a day, every day. That's ~3500 calories/week.
Do the math: If you don't do anything to balance it out, that's over just over 50 pounds a year which can be gained.


but this is America, if 12oz is good 40 is almost 4 times better!!!

(oh that is the point you already made, volume ;) )

Ok.

<rant on>You can't blame things/food/drinks/etc. for making people fat. That is the direct result of the choices that they make. If they choose things that lead to an overall caloric surplus, they'll get fat. If they choose things that will lead to an overall caloric deficit, they'll lose weight. If they choose exercise, they'll be more fit.

You make your own destiny. Choose wisely.</rant>

^^ I agree with this, but there's also culpability in the way these products are advertised. This applies to everything from malt liquor to cigarettes to Big Macs (or anything McDonald's, Wendy's, etc.) to cars to erectile dysfunction drugs. The ad campaigns are designed to to one thing- sell product. If, in order to do that, they have to glamorize the product, even if unhealthy, the ad guys will gladly make a product look as desirable and "must-have" as possible. And in these affluent times (even if many individuals aren't personally affluent), there's an undeniably strong sociocultural norm of consumption- and the more conspicuous the better. You know- just to let others know that you're a part of the society that creates and enforces such a norm.

This in no way exonerates personal responsibility. But it's easy to overlook the responsibility of manufacturers, ad men, and merchandisers in contributing to the obesity epidemic, tobacco-related illness and death, alcoholism, high-speed car crashes, and of course, those erections lasting long than four hours (doesn't everyone want one of those?). These events are altogether too common, except for the last (which is, let's face it, a marketing ploy- there have been a miniscule number of cases of ED drug-induced priapism- really miniscule).

Simple answer: teach people to think for themselves, rather than just following the herd.

Oh, wait... not so simple. Billions of dollars of advertising down the drain, and school systems suddenly not knowing what to do.

^^ I agree with this, but there's also culpability in the way these products are advertised. This applies to everything from malt liquor to cigarettes to Big Macs (or anything McDonald's, Wendy's, etc.) to cars to erectile dysfunction drugs. The ad campaigns are designed to to one thing- sell product. If, in order to do that, they have to glamorize the product, even if unhealthy, the ad guys will gladly make a product look as desirable and "must-have" as possible. And in these affluent times (even if many individuals aren't personally affluent), there's an undeniably strong sociocultural norm of consumption- and the more conspicuous the better. You know- just to let others know that you're a part of the society that creates and enforces such a norm.

This in no way exonerates personal responsibility. But it's easy to overlook the responsibility of manufacturers, ad men, and merchandisers in contributing to the obesity epidemic, tobacco-related illness and death, alcoholism, high-speed car crashes, and of course, those erections lasting long than four hours (doesn't everyone want one of those?). These events are altogether too common, except for the last (which is, let's face it, a marketing ploy- there have been a miniscule number of cases of ED drug-induced priapism- really miniscule).

See, now you're blaming the product manufacturers via the advertisers. There is nothing stopping a person from educating themselves about a product before buying it. We do that a lot, bikes, cars, computers, etc. Do it with food products too. It's not that hard to ignore the advertising. Just make up your mind to do so.

The obesity "epidemic" (I put that in quotes. It's not a disease as it's not caused by a virus or bacterial infection like the flu I have right now. For most it's the result of the choices that they've made. There are a few with legitimate reasons such as thyroid problems, then they can blame their parents) is not the fault of advertising. It's a result of more sedentary lifestyle choices and poor food choices.

Educate yourself, take responsibility for yourself, stop looking for someone else to blame. It's not only the best way, it's the only way.

See, now you're blaming the product manufacturers via the advertisers. There is nothing stopping a person from educating themselves about a product before buying it. We do that a lot, bikes, cars, computers, etc. Do it with food products too. It's not that hard to ignore the advertising. Just make up your mind to do so.

The obesity "epidemic" (I put that in quotes. It's not a disease as it's not caused by a virus or bacterial infection like the flu I have right now. For most it's the result of the choices that they've made. There are a few with legitimate reasons such as thyroid problems, then they can blame their parents) is not the fault of advertising. It's a result of more sedentary lifestyle choices and poor food choices.

Educate yourself, take responsibility for yourself, stop looking for someone else to blame. It's not only the best way, it's the only way.


It would be wonderful if everyone had the skills to seek out the information they need to make informed choices. But they don't, because they aren't taught. Not by parents, not in schools, not anywhere. And to exonerate advertisers form their part in this is irresponsible. Example- while you're taking it easy today (sorry about your flu- are you sure it's the flu??)- look carefully at the next Cadillac ad you see. Think about the behavior that is being modeled for those who view that ad. Then, next time you're out on the road, check out the behaviors of many, if not most of the drivers. Then get back to us.

BTW, obesity is very definitely a disease, and it is very definitely an epidemic. A disease doesn't have to be caused by a micro-organism to be called such. By your logic, heart disease wouldn't be a disease. And when some states have as much as 30% prevalence of overweight or obesity (http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html), that is indeed an epidemic. What would call it if 30% of your state's population had the flu right now? Or had heart disease? Or diabetes?

Also BTW, Arkansas is not among the states with the highest obesity rates. (http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html) At least not with the most current data (2008). Just one of Muhtar Kent's fallacious or incorrect assertions in the editorial.

OP Thanks for posting the link to the article. Mr. Kent is right about one thing, it is a complex issue. I've enjoyed reading the posts above and agree with many of your points.
I support the calorie tax and healthy lifestyle rebates. The last 2 decades have proven that we have a very hard time taking care of our selves, and if these proposed taxes and rebates can educate even a small percentage of our population, then they are entirely worth it.

Now if we could only get back on board with tap water...

It would be wonderful if everyone had the skills to seek out the information they need to make informed choices. But they don't, because they aren't taught. Not by parents, not in schools, not anywhere. And to exonerate advertisers form their part in this is irresponsible. Example- while you're taking it easy today (sorry about your flu- are you sure it's the flu??)- look carefully at the next Cadillac ad you see. Think about the behavior that is being modeled for those who view that ad. Then, next time you're out on the road, check out the behaviors of many, if not most of the drivers. Then get back to us.

BTW, obesity is very definitely a disease, and it is very definitely an epidemic. A disease doesn't have to be caused by a micro-organism to be called such. By your logic, heart disease wouldn't be a disease. And when some states have as much as 30% prevalence of overweight or obesity (http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html), that is indeed an epidemic. What would call it if 30% of your state's population had the flu right now? Or had heart disease? Or diabetes?

Also BTW, Arkansas is not among the states with the highest obesity rates. (http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html) At least not with the most current data (2008). Just one of Muhtar Kent's fallacious or incorrect assertions in the editorial.

I'm not going to argue with you. But the fact is, everyone makes their own decisions. No one is forcing anyone to buy anything. If people choose not to learn about what they're buying, it's their own issue.

Enjoy the day.

Beer drinkers blaming Coke again!:roflmao2:...I drink about half a beer every ten years. I'm scared to watch beer commercials cause I might become an alcoholic!:p

It's a choice! Nobody shoves a beer or Big Mac down my throat! I consume neither!:)

I drink Diet Coke cause I don't anything other than water! Last time I saw a Diet Coke commercial or billboard, I can't remember!:rolleyes:

I love coke,and big macs, and pizza and fries, and deep fried whatever. I enjoy them once in awhile but no one has ever once put a gun to my head and said eat this or die. Like Beanz and others have said it's a choice. I use to go thru a case of 24 coke every two or three days, now one can every so often don't even have pop in the house kids drink milk and juice along with water.

I still like a soft drink every once in a while.. I bought some of the Pepsi throwback (real sugar) when it was out and it sure tastes different than the HFC laced stuff they sell.. My drink of choice today is water or tazo green tea with a little stevia in it..

See, now you're blaming the product manufacturers via the advertisers. There is nothing stopping a person from educating themselves about a product before buying it....

...Educate yourself, take responsibility for yourself, stop looking for someone else to blame. It's not only the best way, it's the only way.

It's not always that simple. Misleading advertising runs rampant these days, companies are getting nailed for it on a daily basis.

Dannon is currently in hot water over its "clinically proven" claims regarding the improvement of digestive health in Activia(tm) consumers. There is no clinical data, but previous to current litigation you'd never know that. All the information presented by the company was in a format similar to clinical trials.

Berkeley Nutraceuticals was nailed repeatedly for false advertising (yet, they're still in business): Claims of clinical trials which never actually occurred, misleading product claims, never-mentioned opt-out re-ordering enrollment, the list goes on and on.

Look at the "healthy alternatives" advertising that McD's pumps out about their salads, yet they fail to mention it's only good for you if you leave off the dressing, cheese, chicken, etc. which is what they're using as a main selling point.

Yes, personal responsibility dictates performing due diligence to make an educated decision; but can you really blame the consumer for making poor decisions if the information presented to them is falsified?

It's not always that simple. Misleading advertising runs rampant these days, companies are getting nailed for it on a daily basis.
...
Yes, personal responsibility dictates performing due diligence to make an educated decision; but can you really blame the consumer for making poor decisions if the information presented to them is falsified?

My point too, Clifton. It's true that no one is actually forcing people to make bad choices, but it's undeniable that advertising is about persuasion. That's the name of Mad Ave's game. Of course, people are responsible for making their own, hopefully educated, choices about everything in life, but that assumes they (we) have the most accurate information upon which to make those choices. As Clifton rightly points out, that information is too often incompletely, or misleadingly, presented in advertising- or even downright falsified- all in order to sell a product. People make choices based on such information, and that's unfortunate.

I'd recommend that everyone watch Food Inc. A bit preachy at the end, but it presents a very sound, balanced view of the way food is created (yes, created), produced (there's a difference between this and created), marketed, and consumed in the US. It's an eye-opener.

Enjoy the day.

You too- hope you feel better :thumb:

You too- hope you feel better :thumb:

Thanks. This flu is awful. I'm hoping it clears up enough that I can go on Saturday's ride.

Thanks. This flu is awful. I'm hoping it clears up enough that I can go on Saturday's ride.

Maybe you should drink more Diet Coke. I drink my share and only get the flu maybe once every three or four years!:D.. and even then, not bad enough to stop me from riding!:p

Maybe you should drink more Diet Coke. I drink my share and only get the flu maybe once every three or four years!:D.. and even then, not bad enough to stop me from riding!:p

The acidity makes your body such an unhospitible host that viruses and bacteria simply die upon entry. :rolleyes:

The acidity makes your body such an unhospitible host that viruses and bacteria simply die upon entry. :rolleyes:



Maybe it's the combination of acid and vinegar! Even the mosquitos won't touch me!:D

Yes, personal responsibility dictates performing due diligence to make an educated decision; but can you really blame the consumer for making poor decisions if the information presented to them is falsified?
I think you can. I believe you need to look at all advertising for what it is. They are paying a ton of money to say pretty much anything to get us to buy/use their product. Even when they aren't flat-out lying, they sure aren't going to give me any information that might make me think I should stay away from their product. With that knowledge, I, as a consumer, need to use my common sense. I should know that dumping 4 oz. of Ranch dressing on a salad isn't a healthy choice just like I should know buying a new Porsche isn't going to land me a gorgeous, 20-year-old blonde like I saw in their ad. It really isn't rocket science in most cases.

Plus we really aren't talking about a serious health problem caused by the "clinically-proven" claim of Activia being false. We're talking about downing 2 gallons of soft drinks loaded with sugar or eating a double bacon cheeseburger and large fries or finishing off a bag of potato chips and doing this day in and day out. And, in spite of advertising to that contrary, Wii isn't the answer to our nation's obesity problem. It mostly comes down to being lazy. Driving through McDonalds for a Happy Meal is easier than making a turkey sandwich on wheat bread with tomato, lettuce, mustard and just a touch of mayo plus the kids aren't going to complain that you are taking them to McDonalds, again. But this is the legacy many parents are passing on to their kids.

We have raised our kids to know what is good for them and what isn't. They eat junk food and drink sodas occasionally (mostly when we're camping) but the majority of their diet is pretty healthy. My older son went away for his first year of college in August. After a month of unlimited cafeteria food, little sleep and even less exercise, he realized his clothes were feeling a bit snug. He emailed me this week that once he realized he was really gaining weight, he started eating better, sleeping more and hitting the gym as well as running most every day. He dropped 10 lbs. and is feeling great.

The benefits of regular exercise and good nutrition have been taught in school for years. But if parents don’t intentionally make it a part of their kids daily lives, it will never solve the problem any more than taxing sodas and Twinkies will solve it.

Maybe it's the combination of acid and vinegar! Even the mosquitos won't touch me!:D

I don't know. I don't drink diet soda's in the first place, I find the taste terrible. Now, I might have some regular Coke with dinner. But I won't be drinking an entire bottle :thumb:

I blame Bazooka Joe personally.

If only we could lift the trade embargo on Cuba...we'd have dirt cheap sugar that could be more cost effective to mass produce with than HFCS.

No one made me fat but me. My family habits started it, because we had to clean our plate before we could leave the table. McDonald's didn't make me eat the Big Mac, which I don't eat anymore unless I just got done with a day of vomiting out of both ends. Then that is something I fall back on and it works for me. But, that is once in the last 3 years if I remember correctly.

I used to eat fruits and minimal vegetables, but then instead of natural sugars, I went for the quick shop food to get me through the day, so my tastes changes. Could I have made my own meals and taken fruit with me? Yes, sir. Did I? Heck no, that would take planning and when you are in your twenties you don't plan anything, then kids came into our life and even less time was available. So, crappy foods, and then the Mountain Dew addiction for my caffeine fix, because coffee and tea are not for me!!!

It is not the companies that caused the problem. It was me and I didn't own up to it.

I think you've got the food industry all wrong! How can something called a "preservative" be a bad thing? After all, our life expectancy, like our obesity rate, continues to increase. Therefore, it is my conclusion that the preservatives we eat are helping us to live longer by preserving our internal organs in a layer of fatty protection! Here's to McHeath!

Side bar: If this logic makes sense to you, seek immediate medical attention! ;)

No one made me fat but me.

My sentiments exactly. Likewise, no one is making me work out to lose the weight but me.

Yes, personal responsibility dictates performing due diligence to make an educated decision; but can you really blame the consumer for making poor decisions if the information presented to them is falsified?


I think you can. I believe you need to look at all advertising for what it is. They are paying a ton of money to say pretty much anything to get us to buy/use their product. Even when they aren't flat-out lying, they sure aren't going to give me any information that might make me think I should stay away from their product. With that knowledge, I, as a consumer, need to use my common sense.

The sad part about this is that you're not sarcastic. You're not joking. As far as I can glean from all this, you honestly believe that if someone is given false or intentionally misleading information regarding a product, the consumer is ultimately responsible for the end result because "they should have known better."
We need to get you a judicial appointment. You could clear up the bottleneck in the legal system within a week: "You did what? Dumbass, you should have known better. Judgment for the defendant; Next Case!" :rolleyes:

The sad part about this is that you're not sarcastic. You're not joking. As far as I can glean from all this, you honestly believe that if someone is given false or intentionally misleading information regarding a product, the consumer is ultimately responsible for the end result because "they should have known better."
We need to get you a judicial appointment. You could clear up the bottleneck in the legal system within a week: "You did what? Dumbass, you should have known better. Judgment for the defendant; Next Case!" :rolleyes:
My point was that we shouldn't be getting our nutritional advice from Hostess any more than we should be getting our cigarette smoking advice from Phillip Morris. We need to teach our kids (and ourselves) that they need to take personal responsibility to find the facts. I'm not saying we shouldn't go after fraudulent claims, just that we can't keep blaming others for our bad decisions. Even when Toucan Sam says his cereal is part of a good breakfast, there is enough nutrition information on the side panel to tell you what you need to know to make an informed decision.

And I'd love to be on the bench. "You burned your crotch because you put a cup of coffee between your legs at the McDonalds drive-through and it spilled? You didn't know their fresh, hot coffee was hot? There should have been a label on the cup warning you that coffee is hot? Judgement for the defendant; Next Case!"

subsidized corn production made America fat.

cheap and plentiful meat, sweets, chips.... etc. Kinda stuck with it now, who's going to tell farmers to screw off and the general populus that food is too cheap?

I was a Brussels a few months back, a tiny Coke (~7 oz) was $4 and if I hadn't been on expense account I don't know how I would have been able to eat!

people aren't necessarily making bad choices...

the producers are not putting the best ingredients in their food...

canning and mass production has taken mom out of the kitchen and the handmade food she crafted from garden grown veggies and the what not... cow that ate grass and corn raised on the farm... without steroids... good farm chickens that ate grain and grasshoppers and not forced and fed supplements to lay eggs all day... (read the other day producers are injecting their chicken breast with saline solution!!! to make it taste better!!! <<<< that is freekin misleading john q public)

mass production of food stuffs and the bottom dollar is to blame...

From The Wall Street Journal, interesting reading from the CEO of Coca-Cola:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574455464120581696.html

A strawman argument likely to be convincing to the ignorant. It ignores the role that fructose intake has in obesity and obesity based illnesses, which is out or proportion to the calories contained. The start of the problem is that fructose is metabolized in the liver *only*, and too much of it leads to a fatty "scarred" liver that doesn't work as well as it should. It also messes up "full" signals in the body. Coke and other fructose bearing drinks are just plain nasty.

Good article:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/healthreport/stories/2007/1969924.htm

My point too, Clifton. It's true that no one is actually forcing people to make bad choices, but it's undeniable that advertising is about persuasion.


Advertisers spend billions of year persuading people to make bad choices - and lobbying to block government restrictions that would cost them profits. You almost need a degree in biochemistry to understand some of the health problems with modern food - and a lot of the worst stuff is aimed at children. Should children be punished for having parents who don't understand why it is significant the transfats block the absorption sites for fatty acids used for building the sheathes for nerve cells? I'm pretty sure that the OP didn't the pathway for fructose metabolism and how coke therefore messes up your body out of proportion to the calories it contains, making a nonsense of the article.

And I'd love to be on the bench. "You burned your crotch because you put a cup of coffee between your legs at the McDonalds drive-through and it spilled? You didn't know their fresh, hot coffee was hot? There should have been a label on the cup warning you that coffee is hot? Judgement for the defendant; Next Case!"

That version of the case is an urban myth:

http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp

and



http://www.caoc.com/CA/index.cfm?event=showPage&pg=facts

The sweatpants Liebeck was wearing absorbed the coffee and held it next to her skin. A vascular surgeon determined that Liebeck suffered full thickness burns (or third-degree burns) over 6 percent of her body, including her inner thighs, perineum, buttocks, and genital and groin areas. She was hospitalized for eight days, during which time she underwent skin grafting. Liebeck, who also underwent debridement treatments, sought to settle her claim for $20,000, but McDonalds refused.

During discovery, McDonalds produced documents showing more than 700 claims by people burned by its coffee between 1982 and 1992. Some claims involved third-degree burns substantially similar to Liebecks. This history documented McDonalds' knowledge about the extent and nature of this hazard.

McDonalds also said during discovery that, based on a consultant's advice, it held its coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees Fahrenheit to maintain optimum taste. He admitted that he had not evaluated the safety ramifications at this temperature. Other establishments sell coffee at substantially lower temperatures, and coffee served at home is generally 135 to 140 degrees.

Further, McDonalds' quality assurance manager testified that the company actively enforces a requirement that coffee be held in the pot at 185 degrees, plus or minus five degrees. He also testified that a burn hazard exists with any food substance served at 140 degrees or above, and that McDonalds coffee, at the temperature at which it was poured into Styrofoam cups, was not fit for consumption because it would burn the mouth and throat. The quality assurance manager admitted that burns would occur, but testified that McDonalds had no intention of reducing the "holding temperature" of its coffee.

Plaintiff's expert, a scholar in thermodynamics as applied to human skin burns, testified that liquids, at 180 degrees, will cause a full thickness burn to human skin in two to seven seconds. Other testimony showed that as the temperature decreases toward 155 degrees, the extent of the burn relative to that temperature decreases exponentially. Thus, if Liebecks spill had involved coffee at 155 degrees, the liquid would have cooled and given her time to avoid a serious burn.


McD's weren't sued for serving hot coffee but serving dangerously hot coffee - coffee that was much hotter and more dangerous than customers expected, without making any effort to caution them to treat it differently or to provide safer containers. If you sell a non-standard, dangerous product and let people think that it is the usual stuff - then expect to get sued when people are hurt.

My point was that we shouldn't be getting our nutritional advice from Hostess any more than we should be getting our cigarette smoking advice from Phillip Morris. We need to teach our kids (and ourselves) that they need to take personal responsibility to find the facts. I'm not saying we shouldn't go after fraudulent claims, just that we can't keep blaming others for our bad decisions. Even when Toucan Sam says his cereal is part of a good breakfast, there is enough nutrition information on the side panel to tell you what you need to know to make an informed decision....


To a large degree I concur; however, I have a nagging concern. As parents we have an opponent who spends mountains on rigorous scientific research, with the specific purpose of trying to overcome what we teach. Their intent is to make profit without regard to the harm they cause, and the means they use to reach that end is to employ the best and brightest minds available. I don't think it's a stretch to consider them responsible with their techniques are successful.

To a large degree I concur; however, I have a nagging concern. As parents we have an opponent who spends mountains on rigorous scientific research, with the specific purpose of trying to overcome what we teach. Their intent is to make profit without regard to the harm they cause, and the means they use to reach that end is to employ the best and brightest minds available. I don't think it's a stretch to consider them responsible with their techniques are successful.

I agree parenting can be an uphill battle. The problem, in my opinion, is that far too many parents don't bother to teach their kids that there is an oposing view.......to EVERYTHING. Or put limits....on ANYTHING. When it comes to the obesity problem, we can blame video games (my kids weren't allowed to have them till they were old enough to earn the money to buy them); lack of PE in school (my kids didn't get enough in school so they did 2 - 3 sports a year plus hiking, biking and other physical activities); TV (parents need to put limits on it); bad food choices (who bought the bad food in most cases?); and the list goes on. As parents we should be treating unhealthy food the same as smoking, drinking and drugs. Warn them, watch them and model the right way.

From The Wall Street Journal, interesting reading from the CEO of Coca-Cola:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574455464120581696.html

The problem with Coke and other soft drinks is they were never intended for daily and consistent use. They were conceived as a emulsion/mixer for medication. A literal "Spoonful of Sugar"

http://catandgirl.com/archive/2009-10-08-cgsoda.gif

I hope they're SPD compatible shoes.

Hmm, seems "soda threads" always produce a LOT of posts. :)

Most people would rather blame someone else for their issues so they can rationalize their responsibility away comfortably and getting people to feel sorry for your lazy a$$ is easier than actually doing something about it.

The obesity issue, at least with myself stems from my own laziness and lack of dietary control. I happen to like Pepsi. I happen to like a lot of crap that isn't good for me, even though it tastes good. I'm not going to blame someone else for my predicament, but when you read something like this (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/79/4/537), it really makes you wonder.

Like everything else in life, if you do anything to excess, it is bad for you. Moderation is the key to everything. That is what parents should be teaching their children.

I came to a point in my own life here and now and decided to retake control of my life.

There are other factors and I'm still discovering those. The single piece of advice my doctor gave me was get away from processed foods. Since I have been working on that, my weight and general health have markedly improved and done so in a fairly short time frame.

I don't really care what the CEO of any soda company has to say because they are a contributing factor to this mess, my mess, and there is plenty of blame to go around. I had to look inward first. ;-)

Oh btw, marketing does as marketing does...they spin a negative into a positive, true or not. That is what they are paid to do. Unlike 30-40 years ago false advertising is no longer a crime.

I blame it on Ben & Jerry. F those two b--tards!! What nerve they have, making ice cream taste so darn good, and making flavors like Cherry Garcia, NYSFC, Chubby Hubby.

Who knew you couldn't eat a pint every day? After all, it's made with natural ingredients. Like milk! Milk, it does a body good (marketing!). But milk comes from cows, and cows are pretty fat, but I never thought of that. I assumed if its made by hippies, it must be healthy -- I mean who ever heard of a fat hippie? Except Mama Cass.

Speaking of Mama Cass, you know who else I blame?

I blame Porky Pig. I mean, cmon, he's so cute and pink and stuttery that there is no way you can't go out and eat a pile of ribs or a few ham sandwiches. Know what I mean?

I can't resist marketing. Or stuttering cartoon characters. Who can?

Coke - it's the real thing. So go drink it.

If Coke makes you fat, drink some 7Up, cause it's the uncola so it must make you skinny.

I think the WSJ piece is right on. People eat a lot more now, and are doing a lot less. Nobody's holding a gun to their heads making them sit in front of the TV all the time.

If the government wants to fix it, start by banning cars at schools.