Posts Tagged Coca-Cola
November 9, 2014
As we get closer to the holidays, many people look for ways to cut back on sugar and other indulgences so that when the New Year rolls around, they won’t have to work so hard to lose those extra pounds. While it is a good idea to avoid sugar altogether, using the artificial sweeteners Splenda or Aspartame might be even worse. There are numerous reasons you should avoid the stuff in little yellow packages (or pink, or blue). Here is why.
Donald Rumsfeld, the very same politician who supports GMOs, is perhaps the singular man who got Splenda onto the market after the FDA initially refused it. If you have gotten sick from consuming this toxic substance, you can thank him, along with its makers. Splenda was created by the British company Tate & Lyle along with the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson.
Perhaps you remember when the Coca-Cola company launched its ad campaign to fight obesity back in the early 80s? This was all part of a ploy to begin the use of aspartame, whose patent was once owned by none other than Monsanto! Ironically, there are numerous studies that show this stuff causes obesity. It doesn’t prevent obesity.
Before they started selling you Splenda, it was called NutraSweet. In 1985, Monsanto purchased G.D. Searle, the chemical company that held the patent to aspartame, the active ingredient in NutraSweet, as well as Splenda and many other artificial sweeteners. Is Splenda safe? It depends who you ask.
Let’s look at a little timeline, shall we?
- 1901: Monsanto Chemical Works is formed.
- 1976: When Ford loses the 1976 election, Rumsfeld returns to private business life, and is named president and CEO of the pharmaceutical corporation G. D. Searle & Company, during which time he leads the legalization of Aspartame.
- 1977: Monsanto stops producing PCBs.
- 1997: Monsanto businesses are spun off as Solutia Inc.
- 1999: John Hunter is named chairman and CEO.
- 2000: Monsanto’s Pharmaceutical Services Division is created. Monsanto also merges with the drug-maker Pharmacia & UpJohn Inc., which took control of the Searle pharmaceutical operations, and the current Monsanto Co. was incorporated as a subsidiary in October 2000.
- 2002: PCB trial results in sharp drop in stock price.
by: Vic Shayne Ph.D.
August 6, 2012
Peering into the politics of the food industry is like getting a peek behind the curtain where the Wizard of Oz is working the controls. It seems quite obvious that food giants like Kellogg work hard to become reputable and good not by the products they produce, but by the friends they make. You really have to look at the whole picture to see what’s going on in the PR arena to understand why, in the end, the consumer gets it in more ways than one.
Buying a reputation by supporting a cause
Besides assessing whether huge food processors are good or bad or just doing their job, we should consider the ethics of associations like the American Heart Association, the Dietitian’s Association and others who readily take the money of corporate sponsors. Does this prevent them from fully disclosing the truth about the unhealthy ingredients in many processed foods? You be the judge.
It’s blunt but to the point
This quote from Common Dreams is so succinct that it bears publishing: “The American Heart Association (AHA) has sullied its reputation by getting in bed with whatever corporation comes around with its checkbook open.”
Way back in 2004, reporter Robert Weissman wrote, “Subway has given $4 million to the American Heart Association (AHA) since 2002, and will gave an additional $6 million through 2007. That’s a total of $10 million. In exchange, Subway gets to put the AHA ‘fighting heart disease and stroke’ logo on its materials throughout its chain of stores, according to an AHA spokesperson.”
Kellogg raises kids on sugar then tells them they should eat right
Here is a direct quote from Kellogg: “Kellogg Company in 2005 kicked off a partnership with the Girls on the Run®, a nonprofit organization that encourages girls ages 8-13 to be more active, eat right and live a balanced and healthy lifestyle. Kellogg is sponsoring Girls on the Run over three years as part of its Kellogg’s Frosted Flakes® Earn Your Stripes™ initiative.”
In 3/4 cup of Kellogg’s Frosted Flake there are 110 calories, zero fat, 140mg of sodium and 11 grams of sugar. Is this Kellogg’s idea of part of a “healthy lifestyle”?
Kellogg also states, ” To demonstrate its commitment and help call attention to this critical health issue, [Kellogg’s] Smart Start Healthy Heart has launched a major heart health initiative. In addition to providing national support for the American Heart Association’s Go Red For Women movement, this initiative includes free health screenings, community events, and on-pack promotions.”
It’s ironic that the maker of so many deleterious sugar-drenched dead food provides health screenings and claims to care about heart disease.
The list of sponsorships by Kellogg goes on. They talk about cancer, obesity and heart disease as being terrible and they say they work for at-risk elementary children.
An optimist might say this is confusing, given Kellogg’s line of processed foods. A more realistic view is to say that they’re riding both sides of the fence. And worse, groups like the AHA allow them to do so by censoring the truth in return for some huge donations.
Why pick on just one company?
Kellogg is but one in a list of corporations that put money in the hands of nonprofits while touting good health programs and serving millions of suffering people junk food. General Mills, the makers of Chocolate Cheerios, claims on their website that this product is a “good source of calcium.” Really? I don’t think so. A good source of calcium is broccoli, organic milk or kale. In a long list of good sources of calcium, Chocolate Cheerios wouldn’t be anywhere near the top.
Then there’s Post, purveyors of Fruity Pebbles children’s cereal. Like the others, they also get the seal of the American Heart Association. No comment necessary.
Kraft is proud to help children make healthy lifestyle choices. How again?
Kraft Foods says it “is proud to collaborate with the Alliance for a Healthier Generation,” an association “founded by the American Heart Association and the William J. Clinton Foundation in 2005…to reduce the prevalence of childhood obesity by 2015 and to empower kids nationwide to make healthy lifestyle choices.”
So, Kraft, maker of something that’s not cheese but is called cheese food, is concerned about our children’s health? Kraft’s Singles contains zero fat. Zero. How can anything made of cheese not contain fat? By the way, good fat is essential to everyone’s health. It feeds the nerves, fuels the hormonal system, is needed for bone and brain development and healthy skin. There’s also no calcium in Singles. How can a milk product not contain calcium? But Kraft gives some big bucks to nonprofits, so that make everything hunky dory.
Who’s sponsoring the American Dietetic Association?
Dietitians get mad at me for writing these kinds of things, but let’s be honest — the American Dietetic Association (ADA) is sponsored by some companies who produce substances that are bad for the health. Go to their website and see what I mean. You will find Coca Cola, Hershey, Mars, Kellogg, General Mills and Pepsico, among others.
August 1, 2012
A new age is arriving in Bolivia. An age devoid of Coca-Cola. According to the Bolivian government, “this will mark the end of capitalism and usher in a new era of equality” in the nation. The expulsion of Coca-Cola from the region follows a year after the nation banned McDonalds as well. From RT:
“December 21 of 2012 will be the end of egoism and division. December 21 should be the end of Coca-Cola,” Bolivian foreign minister David Choquehuanca announced.
The coming ‘end’ of the Mayan lunar calendar on December 21 of this year has sparked widespread doomsaying of an impending apocalypse. But Choquehuanca argued differently, claiming it will be the end of days for capitalism, not the planet.
“The planets will align for the first time in 26,000 years and this is the end of capitalism and the beginning of communitarianism,” said Choquehuanca as quoted by Venezuelan newspaper El Periodiquito.
The minister encouraged the people of Bolivia to drink Mocochinche, a peach-flavored soft drink, as an alternative to Coca-Cola. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez followed suit, encouraging his country to ditch the American beverage for fruit juice produced in Venezuela.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
By: J. D. Heyes
[NaturalNews] After narrowly escaping a federal claim of false advertising with a “pomegranate” drink that contained a barely legal amount of pomegranate juice, now Coca-Cola faces a new issue: cancer-causing ingredients in its namesake beverage.
According to a recent report from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a U.S. watchdog organization, the version of Coke sold in several countries, including Kenya and Brazil, still contains an elevated level of a chemical that has been linked to cancer in animals – months after the beverage giant made changes to Coca-Cola sold in the state of California.
The group said samples of the soft drink were tested in nine countries, and each showed “alarming amounts” of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, or 4-MI, which is used in the soda’s caramel coloring. The group said high levels of 4-MI have been linked to cancer in some animals.
In March Coca-Cola, along with beverage rival PepsiCo, said the companies had requested that suppliers of their caramel coloring change their manufacturing process to fall in line with a ballot initiative in California that sought to limit the public’s exposure to toxic chemicals, Reuters reported.
High content levels remain in some U.S. markets too
Coke officials said the company would start in California, then expand the change in processing to reduce 4-MI content in its signature beverage over time, though they did not give a timeline.
Company execs have said again recently that the caramel coloring in all of its products is safe, repeating that Coca-Cola had asked suppliers to fall in line with California’s labeling requirement.
And, true to form, CSPI said bottles of Coke the group sampled in California contained only four micrograms of 4-MI per 12 ounces of soda. The state requires a warning label if a product would lead consumers to ingest 30 micrograms or more daily.
But samples the group took from Coke products in Brazil contained 277 micrograms per 12 ounces. Soda tested in Kenya contained 177 micrograms.
Even some samples taken in the U.S. were high. A sample taken in Washington, D.C., for instance, contained 145 micrograms, the group said.
Michael Jacobson, CSPI’s executive director, noted that consumers in other countries may typically drink less soda than those in the United States, so they may wind up with less exposure to the chemical after all.
“But now that we know it’s possible to almost totally eliminate this carcinogen from colas, there’s no excuse for Coca-Cola and other companies not to do so worldwide, and not just in California,” he told Reuters, in a statement.
FDA considering ban
The group has provided a petition to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which the agency is considering, that would ban food production processes that create elevated levels of 4-MI. The agency went on to say that, for the time being, there did not appear to be any immediate or short-term danger to American consumers.
Earlier, a spokesman with the FDA said someone would have to consume “well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents.”
Following the CSPI report, Coke officials said they were continuing to work out the logistics for introducing a new caramel coloring process.
“We intend to expand the use of the modified caramel globally to allow us to streamline and simplify our supply chain, manufacturing, and distribution systems,” said the company, in a statement.
4-MI cans, at high doses, caused rabbits, chicks and mice to convulse, according to published data. It was also the most likely cause of acute intoxication observed in cattle fed with ammoniated sugar-containing cattle feed supplements in the 1960s.
But the more pressing concern is its link to cancer. In January 2011, California set a daily intake limit of 16 micrograms as the “No Significant Risk Level.”
Wednesday, March 21, 2012
by Mike Adams
[NaturalNews] Procter & Gamble, the global corporate conglomerate that sells a vast array of consumer products containing cancer-causing chemicals and petroleum derivatives, is now the proud owner of New Chapter, one of the more promising nutritional supplement companies we’ve seen in a while. New Chapter co-founder Paul Schulick announced, “For us, this has been a dream come true. This is what we have been wanting to do since we started doing this 30 years ago. The world and the United States need this.” (http://www.reformer.com/ci_20194274/p-g-buys-new-chapter?source=most_…)
Really? The world needs global corporate giants to buy up all the natural product brands? Or maybe Paul Schulick just wanted to cash in on all the positive publicity organizations like NaturalNews have selflessly lent him over the years. This is one of the many companies we helped publicize and promote, only to see them sell out to corporate giants who routinely take over these companies, cheapen their product formulations, and exploit name recognition to intentionally mislead consumers into buying watered-down, reformulated products.
So now the same company that brings you Tide laundry detergent, Pringles potato chips, Dawn dishwashing soap, and Bounce dryer sheets (can you even think of a more offensive chemical laundry product?) will be bringing you New Chapter supplements, too.
P&G is the very first corporation to bring you canola oil under the brand name “Puritan.” This was later merged into the Crisco brand of oils, which are all high omega-6 vegetable oils that, for decades, have been touted as being “healthy” even though now we know diets high in omega-6 oils promote cardiovascular inflammation.
It’s also the company that sells Prilosec over-the-counter heartburn medicine, meaning P&G is also in the pharmaceutical business. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Procter_%26_Gamble_brands)
Oh, and guess who owns P&G? One of the top shareholders has been none other than Warren Buffett (Berkshire Hathaway), who reportedly owns $4.8 billion in P&G stock (http://seekingalpha.com/article/294569-10-value-stock-picks-of-warren…).
So the next time you think about buying New Chapter supplements, think about your money going into Warren Buffett’s pocket.
The question now is: Will anybody buy New Chapter supplements now that they know Procter & Gamble and Warren Buffet are the corporate operators who own the company?
I sure won’t.
Monsanto and P&G = same institutional owners
Take a look at this: P&G’s top shareholder is Vanguard, a mutual fund. It’s second top shareholder is State Street Corporation. You can see this here:
Now take a look at the top owners of Monsanto:
You got it, they’re exactly the same! Vanguard and State Street.
P&G is also owned in large part by bailout banksters such as JP Morgan and Bank of America — the very banks who received trillions of dollars in bailout funds that will eventually have to be covered by American taxpayers.
Are you starting to connect the dots here? P&G is part of the global corporate elite. Look at its board members, shareholders and financial ties. This is a corporation that’s 100% tied in with the global elite, and now New Chapter has handed over its once-good name, brand and products to this global corporation steeped in chemical products and mass consumerism.
Just another sellout?
I’m disappointed in New Chapter and Paul Schulick. Here’s yet another case of someone who has sold out to the global power elite, apparently oblivious to where this will likely lead. P&G is essentially the Monsanto of the personal care products industry. It manufactures and markets a seemingly endless array of what most NaturalNews readers would call “junk products” made with chemical fillers, petroleum derivatives, artificial fragrances and known carcinogens. It owns the Gillette brand, Duracell, Crest toothpaste (with fluoride, of course), Iams dog foods (GMO corn, anyone?), Pantene hair care products and a long list of others (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Procter_%26_Gamble_brands).
In the natural products industry, someone who announces they work for Procter & Gamble might as well announce they work for Satan himself. And now Paul Schulick has made a deal with that devil, it seems.
Of course, I’m sure Paul has justified it all to himself. The huge financial backing of P&G will allow New Chapter to “expand into more retail outlets,” he’s probably told himself. The deal will show P&G that natural products can be profitable! It will make nutrition mainstream! Yeah, right.
Such delusions are, of course, par for the course in this industry where the rule of thumb is thatglobal corporate giants usually buy health products companies for the sole purpose of running them into the ground. It’s not about making nutrition a success story for P&G, it’s about destroying a company that actually had a shot at growing into a billion-dollar firm.
The global corporate takeover of natural products companies
I happen to know that right now, across the natural products industry, small companies are being gobbled up by the likes of Monsanto, P&G, J&J and other giants. Sometimes it’s done out in the open like with New Chapter; other times it’s done secretly, behind closed doors, where men in suits plot to take over a company that was once a trusted brand name founded by someone who really cared about nutrition (Sunfood).
I know hundreds of founders of nutrition companies, and I’ve been informed about dozens of acquisitions and investment actions. I have never seen a success story of a nutrition company purchased by a large “global elite” corporation. These stories always have the same ending: The products get watered down, consumers shift their demand to a smaller, trusted company, and the financials of the once-great small company collapse. The big corporation ends up either shuttering it or whoring it out using the same brand name but replacing all the quality ingredients with crap filler and toxic chemicals. The only “winner” in these deals is usually the CEO who sold it, and possibly a few board members who also walk away with millions of dollars while their customers who made them great get left with nothing.
I’m actually getting sick of watching this pattern unfold, because time and time again I’ve seen companies that NaturalNews helped make famous end up selling out to corporate giants. Remember Larabar? That founder sold out to General Mills. Remember Burt’s Bees? Sold out to Clorox.
I know there are some good companies out there with their hearts in the right place. Boku Superfood is an honest shop, and I know that folks like Nutiva (John Roulac) and Ruth’s Hemp Foods will never sell out to corporate interests. Nor will Dr. Bronner’s. There are superstars in this industry who live by principle and who aren’t driven by profit alone, but those people are extremely rare.
Sadly, far too many people in the health products industry are just like people in the pharmaceutical industry: They’re greedy, selfish and ready to sell out once a sufficiently large financial offer comes along. It’s sad but true.
Warning to NN readers: Watch out for products and companies that change hands
NaturalNews has helped make millionaires in the industry. We promoted honest brands that later sold out to big corporations who changed their formulas and ingredients. In numerous cases, we would have to go back and modify old articles to take down our recommendations or warn consumers about the changes.
See, NaturalNews is one of the largest health news organizations on the planet, reaching literally millions of readers a month. Our publicizing of companies can, on record, turn them into an overnight success. What people do with that success, however, is a question of personal integrity, and as I said above, integrity is severely lacking in every quarter of society. As the editor of NaturalNews, I have become increasingly skeptical about everything — every company, every product, every CEO — because I know that many people are actively trying to get NaturalNews publicity so they can grow faster and sell out more quickly. And I refuse to knowingly be part of that.
Read product labels, folks! Even on products I might have recommended in the past. Companies change hands. Products change their formulations. For example, I used to recommend a vitamin company called Vitacost. Now they’re a totally different company under different ownership and different formulations.
Companies change hands. Brands change. Ethics are sometimes compromised in the name of profits. I’ve seen it countless times.
Trustworthy companies you need to know about
What I do recommend is companies whose founders and CEOs I believe to be honest, high-integrity people. There are real gems out there — the few honest ones who simply won’t bend no matter what the buyout offer. People like Greg Kunin at Ola Loa (www.DrinkYourVitamins.com). Here’s a real treasure of a person. His product has been knocked off by countless cheap imitators, some of which are far more financially successful because they replace his company’s high-end ingredients with their cheap crap ingredients.
When I think about integrity, I think about David Bronner from Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps. Or Ruth from Ruth’s Hemp Foods (www.RuthsHempFoods.com). John Roulac from Nutiva (www.Nutiva.com). These are people who fight for what they believe in, which is honest food, honest products and real organics. Ronnie Cummins. Jeffrey Smith. High-integrity people who walk their talk and don’t sell out.
I hope you count me, the Health Ranger, as one of them. I’m not selling out, and in fact, I’m totally disgusted by those who do. As of right now, I’m urging all NaturalNews customers toboycott New Chapter productsand stop buying them, period. I would no sooner support Procter & Gamble than I would go out and buy GMO corn seeds from Monsanto. It is against my principles to hand over money to a corporation steeped in chemical products and a history of mindless consumerism.
I don’t buy Monsanto products. Nor Coca-Cola, Nike, PepsiCo or Dean Foods. I don’t buy Procter & Gamble, or Johnson & Johnson for that matter. And I don’t buy the line that somehow P&G owning New Chapter is magically going to transform P&G into a healthy products company. Bull! I predict New Chapter will shortly become another sad casualty of the insatiable corporate eating machine that crushes real health solutions as a way to promote the far more profitable business of endless disease.
For New Chapter, this was the last straw. Because, remember this: Every dollar you now spend on New Chapter is a dollar that supports Procter & Gamble, Warren Buffett and the same institutional investors who own Monsanto.
Spread the word: New Chapter is now owned by Procter & Gamble.