1,000 cans of soda a day? Cancer may be least of your woes
July 6, 2013
By Chris Reed
Greens’ conviction that human beings are the worst thing to ever happen to Gaia manifests itself in water-runoff rules that seek a return to water purity seen last in the days before European explorers arrived in North America. It’s also pretty plain in reflexive opposition to growth or to anything that allegedly will despoil “view planes” anywhere — even “green energy” projects.
But one aspect of this de facto purification ritual that doesn’t get as much attention is the insane determination to treat microscopic trace evidence of toxic chemicals as harbingers of medical disaster. This week, we’ve seen a classic example of this hysteria masquerading as concern about public health. This is from a Wednesday AP report:
“NEW YORK — An environmental group said Wednesday that the caramel coloring used in Pepsi still contains a worrisome level of a carcinogen, even after the drink maker said it would change its formula.
“In March, PepsiCo Inc. and Coca-Cola Co. both said they would adjust their formulas nationally after California passed a law mandating drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens come with a cancer warning label. The changes were made for drinks sold in California when the law passed.
“The chemical is 4-methylimidazole, or 4-Mel, which can form during the cooking process and, as a result, may be found in trace amounts in many foods.
“Watchdog group The Center for Environmental Health found via testing that while Coke products no longer test positive for the chemical, Pepsi products sold outside of California still do.”
No studies show it causes cancer in humans. So what, let’s ban it anyways!
But just how big a threat is “4-Mel”? AP buried those facts:
“Trace amounts of 4-Mel have not been linked to cancer in humans. The American Beverage Association said that California added the coloring to its list of carcinogens with no studies showing that it causes cancer in humans. It noted that the listing was based on a single study in lab mice and rats.
“The Food and Drug Administration has also said that a consumer would have to drink more than 1,000 cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered that have shown links to cancer in rodents.”
Congratulations to The Center for Environmental Health for figuring out such a fundraising scam. Congrats to the idiots in the Legislature who bought the center’s scam so they could burnish their we-love-Gaia reputations.
And apologies to Pepsi and Coke for having to play along with this idiotic quasi-religious alarmism.
2 comments
Write a commentRelated Articles
Governor as dictator
June 27, 2013 By John Seiler “Hail Caesar!” Gov. Jerry Brown likes classical references. So that’s one we should salute
What CA fracking advocates can learn from PA
Jan. 31, 2013 By Chris Reed As Californians begin to appreciate the immense economic potential of the state’s underground natural gas
Minimum wage debate heats up in Los Angeles
What if three different studies on the effects of a minimum wage increase in Los Angeles each came up with
The RDA for potassium is ~4000 milligrams. One of the newly formed FDA’s very first laws, still in effect today, limits potassium supplements to no more than 99 milligrams. This is still so even though most Americans consume only half that RDA per day.
Sorry. Bloomberg has already banned drinking more than one coke.
Did these researchers figure out that the humans would end up weighing a couple thousand pounds from the sugar intake before the cancer killed them?
I’d guess that during research, the scientests only fed the mouse the one chemical, and not the entire coke. The mouse would have to weigh a couple hundred pounds before the cancer killed it if it was made to drink all the coke.
Hondo……..