Give Up Soda for Lent & for Life!… “Popular Soda Ingredient Poses Cancer Risk to Consumers” Still

Yet another reason to give up on soda!  In the news… 

Research analysis suggests that soda drinkers consuming 1 or more cans per day are possibly being exposed to 4-methylimidazole, a potential carcinogen. 

Excerpts from latest news release from Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health are as follows:

“Public health researchers have analyzed soda consumption data in order to characterize people’s exposure to a potentially carcinogenic byproduct of some types of caramel color. Caramel color is a common ingredient in colas and other dark soft drinks. The results show that between 44% and 58% of people over the age of six typically have at least one can of soda per day, possibly more, potentially exposing them to 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI), a possible human carcinogen of caramel color.  The results were published [February 18, 2015] in PLOS One…

Building on an analysis of 4-MEI concentrations in 11 different soft drinks first published by Consumer Reports in 2014, researchers led by a team at the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future (CLF) estimated exposure to 4-MEI from caramel-colored soft drinks and modeled the potential cancer burden related to routine soft drink consumption levels in the United States.

Soft drink consumers are being exposed to an avoidable and unnecessary cancer risk from an ingredient that is being added to these beverages simply for aesthetic purposes

…says Keeve Nachman, PhD, senior author of the study and director of the Food Production and Public Health Program at the CLF and an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health;  This unnecessary exposure poses a threat to public health and raises questions about the continued use of caramel coloring in soda.’ 

…Results also indicated that levels of 4-MEI could vary substantially across samples, even for the same type of beverage. ‘For example, for diet colas, certain samples had higher or more variable levels of the compound, while other samples had very low concentrations,’ says Tyler Smith, lead author of the study and a program officer with the CLF.  

While there’s currently no federal limit for 4-MEI in food or beverages, Consumer Reports petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to set limits for the potential carcinogen last year. It also shared the findings with the California Attorney General’s office, which enforces the state’s Proposition 65 law aimed at reducing consumers’ exposure to toxic chemicals. Under this state law, any food or beverage sold in the state that exposes consumers to more than a specific amount of 4-MEI per day requires a health-warning label.

This new analysis underscores our belief that people consume significant amounts of soda that unnecessarily elevate their risk of cancer over the course of a lifetime,’ says Urvashi Rangan, PhD, executive director for Consumer Reports’ Food Safety and Sustainability Center. ‘We believe beverage makers and the government should take the steps needed to protect public health. California has already taken an important step by setting a threshold for prompting Prop 65 labeling based on daily 4-MEI exposure from a food or beverage, such as a soda. This study sought to answer a critical question: How much soda do American consumers drink on average?’…

In addition, researchers found sharply contrasting levels of 4-MEI in some soft drinks purchased in the New York metropolitan area, versus California. ‘Our study also found that some of the soft drink products sold in California that we sampled had lower levels of 4-MEI than the samples we looked at of the same beverages  sold outside the state…’ says Nachman…

An FDA intervention, such as determining maximum levels for 4-MEI in beverages, could be a valuable approach to reducing excess cancer risk attributable to 4-MEI exposure in the U.S. population.’”

Note:  Article stated the 2014 study of the 110 samples of soda brands was not large enough to recommend one brand over another or draw conclusions about specific brands, especially considering there were substantial variations amongst samples as indicated above. 

Still, besides issue of caramel coloring, concern for soda’s potential effect over time upon the liver, endocrine system, appetite, metabolism, and inflammation, remains.  

Time to get back to the true real thing(s)… And give that soda up.

Just say... No.

Just Say No.


2 thoughts on “Give Up Soda for Lent & for Life!… “Popular Soda Ingredient Poses Cancer Risk to Consumers” Still

    • Hi Casey. It’s also sad how habit-forming it can be—and so cheaply made available.
      Just for comparison, here in my neck of the woods, the current price of a 64-ounce jug of milk (store-brand) versus a 67.6-ounce bottle of cola (store-brand) is $2.19 versus a mere 88 cents!
      Therefore, the milk is costing us two-and-a-half times more than the soda!! 😮 But what’s the soda costing us in health?!
      That is scary.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s