Legacy softdrink lovers alert!

[arbilab]

Remember drugstore soda fountains where they'd mix things like cherry syrup into Coke upon request? Remember when HFCS didn't make all softdrinks taste like drain cleaner? Pepsi is experimenting with the viability of that market.

After several years as a 'test product' Pepsi has made sugar Pepsi a mainline product. At standard prices, unlike Coke/Dr Pepper/others who make or import sugar formulas at greatly exaggerated prices up to $2/12oz.

This is the second year Pepsi has experimented with sugar Wild Cherry Pepsi. It's not 'fer shure' available everywhere. Just came to Kroger and I just got my hands (tongue) on some. ZOWEE! I don't care if Coke TM'd the phrase "real thing"-- which US Coke definitely is NOT-- Cherry Pepsi IS! I'm going back to Kroger and buy all they have against the possibility it may disappear.

You'll have to look closely. I asked the Pepsi guy, he pointed to it in those plastic screwtop bottles that wont stand up on wire fridge shelves, I said "yes it says sugar but it doesn't say cherry". It's like they're hiding it. "Cherry" is on the label but you have to turn it sideways to see it.

Anyhow if legacy soda flavors are something you miss, try Sugar Wild Cherry Pepsi and if you like it (pretty sure you will) buy all they have. All Pepsi has to see is that there is demand for REAL flavors and they will meet it. Stop HFCS pollution in the foodchain and have a great time doing it.

 

[washer111]

I'm glad to hear that at least one manufacturer in the US has the necessary grey matter needed to comprehend the fact that HFCS is vile, inedible stuff for our food. 

 

We're lucky in that it hasn't gained any momentum (AFAIK) here in Australia. However, friends of mine in the US* have pointed out that its nigh-unto-impossible to find ANYTHING without the stuff in it. This includes even simple lunch meats, apparently. 

 

*In November, I will see just how bad "Coke" and "Pepsi" are in the US.

Then I will see if Sugar Free/Diet/Zero soft-drinks taste better, for a change... 

Finally, I will see if soft-drinks back "Down-Under" are as good as I make them out to be

 

[frigilux]

I applaud and welcome the return of sugar in lieu of high fructose corn sugar in beverages!

Unfortunately, a July diagnosis of pre-diabetes dictates a drastic reduction in daily carbs (140 grams of carbs spread evenly over three meals and two snacks); thus a drag-me-kicking-and-screaming change to sugar-free pop---and only an occasional one of those, mainly because I don't like the taste of diet versions.

I'll have to rely on others to take up the cause on this one.

 

[washman]

Along with being old school in most everything else

I long for the days of glass bottles with pull off lids, ie the kind that you need an opener for AND good old fashioned sugar.

From time to time, Dad sends up some Big Red he scores at his local Cracker Barrel. It is a real treat on a hot summer day. Smells and tasts like bubblegum but I love it anyway.

Mexican coke is a real treat too.

 

[launderess]

Don't know about Pepsi

But Coke long has produced and widely distributed a version made with cane sugar for sale around the Jewish High Holy Days. You just have to look for the kosher marking on can/bottles. IIRC also in Mexico you can still routinely find Coke made with sugar instead of HFCS.

As for glass bottles, yes again IIRC Coke does have a limited distribution of that as well.

 

[kb0nes]

Sugar vs Corn Syrup

I'm personally totally unconvinced that sugar holds any advantage over corn syrup. Most of the information that touts that sugar is better from a health standpoint probably has some funding from the sugar industry. They both have risks, especially for diabetics.

On the other hand, if one must drink sweetened beverages, artificial sweeteners are most likely healthier. Yes there have been various studies (possible funded by the sugar people again?) that have "shown" problems with artificial sweeteners. But none of those studies have really been conclusive when applied to human consumption. On the other hand, I think we can be fairly certain that sugar has significant health risks!

This is a nicely done presentation by Dr Aaron Carroll from Healthcare Triage

 

[tomturbomatic]

You're close

Actually, it's Passover Coke since to be kosher for Passover, it can't have any association with corn so HFCS is O-U-T. It should be back in half a year or so. I knew some people who bought their year's worth of Coke in the spring.

 

[washer111]

I am reminded of a quote after watching the video above: "A harmful product does not become safe because interests have been vested." 

 

The most curious were the references to Aspartame. A couple of things I want to note:

First, the company responsible for the creation of (G.D. Searle) was the first company to have ever been put under criminal investigation by the FDA (1977)

 

Second, the FDA's investigation produces the Bressler Report, which systematically pulls apart the work of Searle and highlights the inconsistencies in its testing procedures. 

 

And, finally, the third point, in 1980 the FDA bans Aspartame again, after three independent scientists concluded that it can induce brain tumors, among other illnesses/disorders.

Searle's Chairman intervenes now, after Reagan's inauguration, in order to get the product un-banned - a panel is called and votes 3-2 against lifting the ban. A six person was then added, creating a stalemate, then the FDA chairman (Arthur Hayes Hull, Jr.) adds his own actions and has the ban lifted... 

 

These details aside, I think it is important to avoid chemical-laden foods as much as possible in our lives. While they may not produce any substantial evidence now, whose to say they aren't working and perhaps damaging our psychology, or even working at an undetectable level (which could affect generations to come)?

 

If, however, the claims on artificial sweeteners are moot, then thats just the tip of the iceberg. Quite a lot of "other stuff" ends up in a can of coke. This includes methanol and benzene, BOTH in quantities that well-exceed "daily exposure limits" set by health regulatory bodies. Heck, if I want to go to town, I'll freely admit every cup of coffee I drink contains about 10mg of carcinogens(!)

 

[arbilab]

Having performed the blind experiment-- US/HFCS Coke vs. Mexican/sugar Coke in glasses someone else poured-- I could instantly tell which was which by the smell alone. One smells like Coke when I was a kid drinking 55 gallon drums of it. The other smells like-- as I said-- drain cleaner.

THAT'S why sugar holds an advantage. Health-smealth, nobody drinks soda for nutrition. It's all about taste.

Aspartame and acesulfame-K, besides being disgusting in the flavor realm are highly questionable in the health realm. Just the fact Reagan had something to do with aspartame after it failed approval twice is all I need to know. But if it weren't, you knew how they got it to pass the rat test the third time, right? By going back over the results and deleting the 30% fatalities as 'coincidental'. If the choice were one of those or nothing at all I'd go with nothing.

Anybody notice that epidemic obesity coincides exactly with industry-wide adoption of HFCS? Or that adoption coincides exactly with the Carter-era 'sugar protection act' which grossly inflated the cost of cane sugar at the behest of Monsanto, Archer-Daniels-Midland, Cargill, and the corn producers association. Same guys who made you put corn ethanol in your car, knocking ~20% off your mileage.

If HFCS is 'the same as sugar' like the industry ads insist, howcome the $M flavor geniuses at Coke et al couldn't make HFCS Coke taste-- or even SMELL-- like sugar Coke? Anyhow, I wasn't going to make this a chemistry dissertation but since it came up I had to say something.

I drink a soda a day as a flavor treat. I know people who drink a soda an HOUR. IMO, anything besides water poured down one's gullet in such quantities with zero nutritional value is a bad idea. I quit soda altogether when HFCS came to be, for lightly-sugared iced tea with lime. It's still part of my beverage cycle. Only when sugar soda reemerged did I start buying it again. It's not a treat when it tastes rancid like HFCS, aspartame, acesulfame-K do. I see a LOT of labels saying "no HFCS" so evidently I'm not the only one.

 

[whirlcool]

I've only seen sugared Mexican coke in bottles, I don't think it comes any other way. Sam's sells it by the 24 bottle case for about $18.00 which makes it less than a $1.00 per bottle.

For me, Coke with HFCS is too syrupy and sticky. It's not all that refreshing. While Coke with cane sugar is not sticky and is refreshing. There is a difference.

Coca Cola knows about the success of Mexican Coke in the U.S. and it pisses them off. You would think they would offer Coke with cane sugar in it again. But they won't. They claim sugar prices are prohibitive.

I've looked for Passover Coke at our local Jewish Food Store and when they do get it in it disappears very quickly. You almost got to get there on the first day lest all supplies be gone.

I like Cherry Coke, I imagine I'd like Cherry Pepsi, especially with real sugar.
Thank you for letting us know about this.

 

[jetcone]

Mexican Coke

only in this house !!!

 

Just bought my winter case at Costaco !!

 

 

 

[stricklybojack]

I buy..

.
Pepsi throwback every winter holiday.
Guess it's a regular thing now.

 

[arbilab]

Sugar Pepsi is no longer experimental or called 'throwback'. It was so successful it was promoted to full-line product. If it weren't for the sugar version I would not be a Pepsi customer at all. Not likely I'm the only one.

I actually prefer sugar Coke. But their limited/import version costs more than twice as much while Pepsi is priced the same as all their products.

So, Coke, howcome sugar is cost prohibitive for you and not for Pepsi? Pepsi sells what I want at the standard price and you don't. Nevermind Coke, go carbonate yourself.