By Kimberly J. Decker, Contributing Editor
When is a beverage not a beverage? When it’s a political football. That’s just what everything from sodas and energy elixirs to juices, teas and even old-fashioned chocolate milk has become as health officials and the public dig under the metaphorical couch cushions for something—anything—to explain ballooning obesity rates.
This football is taking a beating, too. Already, California, Connecticut and New York, along with many other local jurisdictions, have enacted soft-drink bans in schools. By 2009, 33 states had imposed soft-drink sales taxes. And earlier this year, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg tried to prohibit purchases of sweetened beverages using food stamps.
The mayor lost that battle, but he and others of like mind won’t soon abandon the wider fight. That’s why manufacturers across the beverage industry, either as a matter of compliance or strategic product design, are revisiting how they sweeten their products.
Easy target
Say what you will about their merits as policy, the current lawsuits, legislation and general lashing-out at sweetened drinks is the new normal. Admittedly, sodas and other beverages that rack up calories from added sugars offer an enticing target for anti-obesity activists. Their sheer ubiquity is the first strike against them. Consumers constantly confront not only exhortations to “rehydrate," but opportunities to do so. No longer need we search for a vending machine or minimart to get a liquid pick-me-up; now, even the public library and DMV double as snack bars and cafés.
While inflation-adjusted price drops have brought soft drinks within reach of more consumers over the decades, that leveling of the economic playing field looks more like class warfare when seen as enabling the overconsumption of a product with negative health consequences, as soft-drink foes claim.
Empty calories?
“Independent of whether you’re talking about soft drinks, other beverages or snacks, there’s a fair argument that in countries that consume a lot of sugar, you see a higher incidence of obesity and diabetes," says Sam Newberg, vice president, sales, GLG Life Tech Corporation, Vancouver, British Columbia. “But beverages are going to come under increased scrutiny because there is a lot of sugar in them. People may not have an accurate understanding that there are 39 grams of sugar in a typical 12-oz. can of full-sugar cola."
Our capacity to account—and, therefore, to compensate—for those calories is poorer in beverages than it is in solid foods, too. Thus, while we might forgo dessert after polishing off a 250-calorie sports bar for a snack, we probably wouldn’t make the same sacrifice to balance out the bottle of isocaloric grape soda we drank with it.
Some have used this observation to heap further empty-calorie accusations upon an already burdened beverage category—even though, as the body’s energy currency, no calorie is truly empty. Nevertheless, as a 2001 study in The Lancet showed, each extra can or glass per day of sugar-sweetened beverage increases a child’s chances of becoming obese by 60% (Feb. 17; 357(9,255):505-508), underscoring the lesson that all calories count in our current battle of the bulge.
High fructose, higher drama
“There’s a general mindset among beverage manufacturers to reduce the amount of sugar in these products," Newberg says. Right now the brightest spotlight seems to be on high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS).
Of course, everyone from nutrition activist Marion Nestle to corn processors themselves point out that, as far as the body is concerned, sugar is sugar. “Your body cannot tell the difference between high-fructose corn syrup and sugar or honey—and all are safe and natural," notes Nicole Reichert, senior communications counselor, Cargill Corn Milling, Minneapolis. Yet the belief persists that HFCS is the culprit in the obesity epidemic.
In truth, HFCS was the corn-milling industry’s answer to a liquid sweetener that could rival sucrose in taste, function, economy and operational ease. HFCS is easy to pump from truck to storage to production, where crews can dilute it to the appropriate solids with little added work or energy. The sweetener itself remains stable under acidic conditions—think soft drinks and citrus beverages—and delivers a consistent, inconspicuous sweetness that’s comparable to sucrose and lasts through a product’s shelf life. And in a world of unpredictable weather patterns, geopolitical upheavals and volatile commodity costs, why take a safe option off the shelf?
