Low-carb sodas ... numbers don't add up
June 29, 2004
With the release of C2 and PepsiEdge, the rivalry is back between Coke and Pepsi, however, something seems to be a little fishy if you ask me.
Judging from their respective websites, the nutrition information is similar.
Pepsi Edge (8 oz)
Calories -- 50
Total Fats (g) -- 0
Sodium (mg) 25
Total Carbohydrates (g) -- 13
Sugars (g) -- 13
Protein (g) -- 0 | C2 (8 oz)
Calories -- 45 |
So it appears as though Coke may have beat Pepsi in calories, but they don't tell you anything else. Pepsi, does not appear to be hiding anything with their website, but Coke on the otherhand, I'm not so sure.
As health conscious as people are you would think that you would list your calories as is and not round numbers. Coke's website points out that in 12 oz, there are 70 calories. Me (being the little mathematician that I am) did the conversion from 8 to 12 ounces proportionally. There should only be 67.5 calories in the 12 oz portion. How funny that 2.5 calories came from somewhere. Okay, 2.5 ... I can handle that, but if they added 2.5 calories more than is proportional in the 12 oz cans, what about the 20 oz bottles (the only other form C2 is being sold in). Yes, you look at the label and say "good" only 45 calories, but with 2.5 servings you are actually downing well over a hundred calories with the drink.
I'm asking all you health nuts out there, it the 100 calories worth the soda, or would you stick to juice, something you can actually get some sort of nutrition out of?
Posted by Brian McCollum at June 29, 2004 12:34 PM
| TrackBack
Comments
Oh, I just noticed on the right side of the C2 website, there is an asterix next to the word 'CALS', but it doesn't reference anything ... fishy.
Posted by: Brian at June 29, 2004 12:40 PM
I think 100 calories would be worth it for the soda, provided you don't drink too much. Everything should still be done in moderation, and a soda a day won't kill you. I, for one, like the taste of Coke, and don't mind using up some of my daily calories on it.
But that's where most people go wrong-- they treat soda as if it were water and neglect to notice that it still contains calories. Another problem is serving size. Most people are happy with a bucket of soda, but I have a hard time finishing a 20-oz. soda, even when I'm eating salty McDonald's food. I was giddy when they introduced the smaller cans :-)
So my conclusion: juice has its place in a well-balanced diet, but so does soda, if you don't abuse it.
Posted by: Donna at June 29, 2004 04:01 PM
Imagine how many calories are in a 20 oz. bottle of regular soda. I don't think it matters -- juice or soda -- frankly, as proven by many juice drinks (except for maybe "real" juices), they don't have much nutrition in the first place. Just eat an orange if you want nutrition. You can even get them at Sheetz.
Anyway, ever the product taster, I've had the C2, and it tastes like regular with a little splash of diet...like if you were to mix Coke with diet at the fountain, but the "diet" taste is barely noticable.
Shouldn't the real question ask why we need so much sugar in soda to begin with, if they can make it with less and still have it taste suspiciously similiar?
Posted by: Julie at June 29, 2004 04:02 PM
I guess I'm biased because I don't like dark soda, but even if there were lighter sodas with the same 'condition,' it wouldn't necessarily get me to drink more soda than i currently do (which isn't much at all).
Posted by: Brian at June 29, 2004 06:12 PM
I like the healthy alternative to soda: take plain or fruit-flavored seltzer water and add a juice of your choice. Tasty, and not nearly as much calories.
Fun for the whole family!
Posted by: Ashley Parker at June 30, 2004 09:49 AM
I really like those fruity flavored water drinks... those are yummy and have no carbs, calories, fat, or whatever...
I do not like Coke or Pepsi... I'm not a big fan of pop.
Posted by: Firefighter Chica at July 2, 2004 12:28 AM
Post a comment
