Evil fruit drinks

[Deleted]

I'm sure that a lot of us already know this, but it always good to refresh one's memory about unhealthy fruit drinks.

[tod2]

Yes, they are hellish! My son was put on a strict diet when he was about 12yrs old and when the dietitian discovered I had substituted his coke with 'Liquifruit' she wailed loudly. I had to water it down to one third /two thirds water.
That's as bad as only having a spritzer with a meal instead of a full bodied dark and gloriously maroon glass of Merlot...........sigh

[rikita]

hm i mainly drink water, but i have phases where i really like drinking juice... for a while the cheaper once which i am sure are full of sugar, but sometimes when i feel i can afford it the so-called "direktsaft" (dictionary says it is NFC juice in English). i wonder if that is less unhealthy (it is quite expensive, so i always hope it is...)

i don't like watered down juice though. or watered down soft drinks. i rather drink. water on two days and then juice or coke pure on the third, than mixing juice with water.

[imec]

As I'm in a kind mood I'll just say this is poor journalism (in a less kind mood I would say it's sensational, misleading CRAP!).

"How so?" you ask?

Let's take this thing apart...

"Soda in Disguise"

The "infographic" implies that one of the main the problems with these drinks is that they don't contain a lot of juice. SO WHAT? The Snapple Apple used as an example contains 10% juice and a bunch of water, sugar and added flavor. The whole package adds up to 27 grams of sugar. If it were 100% juice, with NO added sugar, it would contain 27 grams of sugar!


"Fruit Drinks vs. Soda"

Here they compare the sugar and calorie content of arbitrarily chosen juice drinks with arbitrarily chosen food items.

First problem: What the hell is the relationship between Cranberry Drink and Fried chicken legs? Why did they choose the MM Cranberry at 150 (instead of perhaps the Snapple Apple at 110)and why did they choose a chicken leg instead of a thigh, breast or wing???

Second problem: WHERE did they get the calorie counts for the chicken? I went to the site they cited as a reference and found counts for a fried chicken leg ranging from 100 calories (a very diminutive chicken me-thinks) to 430 (that's what I'm talkin' about!)!!!

Third problem: This one really bugs me... YES, there IS more sugar in the drink than the Krispy Kreme doughnut. HOWEVER, the sugar in the donut is wrapped up in other carbs and fat bringing the calorie count of the donut to DOUBLE that of the drink! Eat the 2 1/2 donuts they use as a comparative serving and you're consuming more than 500 calories!!!!!



"Who's Behind This?":

Big beverage companies? BULLSHIT! Parents are behind this! Don't blame the big beverage companies, EACH of which manufactures and heavily promotes diet drinks - no, these are NOT necessarily healthy (or unhealthy for that matter) but the primary message of the infographic is the danger of excessive sugar consumption. Parents have all the information they need to teach their children how and why to make "healthier" choices - too many of them however choose to abdicate this responsibility.



"What Consumers Can Do?"

Consumers can stop being so damn lazy and read the damn labels! All these products come in packages with clear and concise information about their nutritional content - how much sugar, fat, sodium, fibre, calories etc. etc. etc. READ IT! The last thing we need is more regulation - and what if the advertising regulation doesn't work? Ban sugar in drinks? Force juice suppliers to REMOVE the natural sugar from their products? Come on people, focus on what consumers CAN do instead of creating more things we CAN'T do!


There is NO excuse in this day an age for consumers to allow themselves to be misled by advertising - NOR by poor journalism masquerading as "health Science". We have all of the facts we need and the education to understand them - we have only ourselves to blame for poor eating habits.

[Deleted]

I have never seen a completely honest survey. People always take the available statistic that best suits their conclusion.

Meanwhile, France has voted a controversial law to put an extra tax on sweet drinks except pure fruit juice. The controversy comes from the fact that it was first announced as a tax for the benefit of public health to reduce sugar consumption, and then they decided to tax artificially sweetened drinks as well. The fact it, they just wanted a new tax to fill the coffers. Not an authentic thought was given to public health or they would have taxed fruit juice as well.