Softpedia
 

NEWS CATEGORIES:



NEWS ARCHIVE >>
SOFTPEDIA REVIEWS >>
MEET THE EDITORS >>
TRENDING TODAY
Home > News > Life and Style > Tasty & Healthy

February 17th, 2011, 21:31 GMT · By

Chemicals for Caramel Coloring in Coca Cola, Pepsi Cause Cancer

SHARE:

Adjust text size:

FDA is urged to ban ingredients giving cola its specific “caramel” color over cancer fears
Enlarge picture
Chemicals used to give Coca Cola, Pepsi and other similarly-colored fizzy drinks their “caramel” coloring cause cancer, the Center for Science in the Public Interest says in a petition to the FDA, asking it to ban its use.

According to the group, the chemicals used to create the “caramel” coloring in these beverages and which do not occur in nature, can cause a variety of cancers – and should therefore be banned, Food Safety News reports.

If the FDA chooses to ban the ingredient, then all the major companies will be forced to alter their recipes for cola and replace it – or else agree to include a cancer warning on the label, like is the case with cigarettes, for instance.

As the CSPI puts it in the petition to the FDA, the caramel color in fizzy drinks is the result of a reaction between sugars with ammonia and sulfites, in controlled temperatures and under high pressure.

These reactions “result in the formation of 2-methylimidazole and 4 methylimidazole, which in government-conducted studies caused lung, liver, or thyroid cancer or leukemia in laboratory mice or rats,” the CSPI states.

Both 2-MI and 4-MI are carcinogens and there’s “clear evidence” for that, the CSPI adds in the same petition.

As such, the FDA should ban their use, mandating that companies replace it with something else or, if not, include a cancer warning on the label of each recipient.

“Carcinogenic colorings have no place in the food supply, especially considering that their only function is a cosmetic one. The FDA should act quickly to revoke its approval of caramel colorings made with ammonia,” executive director Michael F. Jacobson says, as cited by the aforementioned media outlet.

Representatives for Coca Cola and Pepsi Co. were not immediately available for comment on the latest claims. A statement from the Grocery Manufacturers Association says the allegations are groundless and that there’s no proof that these two chemicals are human carcinogens.


8,692 hits · 11 comments
Link to this article · Print article · Send to friend

MUST-READ RELATED ARTICLES:


PepsiCo to Become Healthier with New Performance with Purpose Campaign

Pepsi Outraged by Leaked Michael Jackson Accident Video

Coke Zero Banned in Venezuela for Serious Health Concerns

Coca Cola Launches Green Tea Flavor in Japan

Diet-Friendly Foods Are Not that Friendly

READER COMMENTS:


Comment #1 by: Charly on 17 Feb 2011, 22:56 UTC reply to this comment

Based on the recently discovered carcinogens known as 2-methylimidazole (2-MI) and 4-methylimidazole (4MI) that gives Coco-cola, Pepsi, and other sodas its "caramel" color; does that mean certain sugary solids such as semisweet, soft, chocolate chip, chewy Chips Ahoy cookies (that also includes "caramel" coloring if you look at the list of ingredients on the side of the red bag) include the same potential risks of lung, liver, and thyroid cancers as shown in laboratory rats and mice from the sodas? From what I heard, some doctors think it takes an excessive amount to even consider the cancer risks but even if that is true, don't most Americans consume sodas everyday thus explaining why several citizens have diabetes (specifically hyperglycemics), and obesity problems which eventually leads to atherosclerosis and/or cardiovascular diseases yearly? Now people don't have to worry about checking their glucose levels or skimming how much sugar a soda can or 1 litter plastic bottle have but worry about drinking a hazardous beverage as dangerous as engulfing a paint thinner with ammonia that could cause cancer in various parts of the human body such as your lungs, throat, or liver. I do hope the soda companies change their ingredients, if not, by all means ban it please.


Comment #2 by: Andy on 20 Feb 2011, 19:56 UTC reply to this comment

THIS IS RIDICULOUS- I have been drinking Coke for 60 of 66 years, my borther for 62 of 68 years about ever other day and no cancer. THIS WILL BE ANOTHER (FDA) BIG BROTHER GOVERNMENT program that will cost us tax payers and big business $BILLIONS- I will contact my Congress man to stop this communications now...Let us keep Coke the color we have grown up with and Like. LET'S FOCUS ON IMPROVING THE ECONOMY....Andy

Comment #2.1 by: rich5150 on 07 Jan 2012, 12:52 GMT

Just because you don't have cancer does not imply there are no risks involved. That's like saying you should keep smoking because you dont have cancer yet.

Who cares about the colour of coke anyway? If it tasted the same and was a different colour, who cares. It's bad for you regardless of these new findings.

Comment #2.2 by: Andy on 07 Jan 2012, 16:20 GMT

You my friend are being ridiculous. Just because you and your brother haven't got cancer, you think that means that these "known to be carcinogens" do not cause cancer? I know lots of people your age that smoke, that don't have cancer (yet). Are you saying cigarettes do not cause cancer?


Comment #3 by: Sara B. on 21 Feb 2011, 14:44 UTC reply to this comment

My semi sweet chocolate chips do not contain 2-methylimidazole (2-MI) and 4-methylimidazole (4MI). I have nestle chocolate chips.


Comment #4 by: hal9000 on 28 Feb 2011, 13:45 UTC reply to this comment

I only drink beer :)

Comment #4.1 by: Sam on 28 Nov 2011, 21:52 GMT

Lol Really:P

Comment #4.2 by: Dinosoredad on 29 Feb 2012, 19:25 GMT

Sorry, check the literature and your beers' ingredients. Beer also has been shown to contain caramel coloring subject to Prop 65 labeling. Roasted coffee can also contain the contaminants, due to the heating process. The Pro 65 warnings are just that, warnings that some rodents get cancer when exposed to large doses of these chemicals. Drinking excessive soda or beer carries far more risks to your health than trace amounts of contaminant chemicals.The lawyers will fight this one out- I'll take my soda over ice to dilute things to a safe level. Cheers.


Comment #5 by: fun4life on 10 Mar 2012, 18:23 UTC reply to this comment

For years growing up we heard that you should use these products for cleaning battery acid off of cars! I stop drinking these years ago, but even so there are so many chemicals that these companies have put in long shelf life products that you would have to cut out a lot of products to cut back on the affects of chemicals. Meanwhile, the corporations can tell you anything to keep you coming back. Soo, you have to do your own research. We did not grow up on all these packaged products, so you choose for yourself!


Comment #6 by: Bruce Barron on 17 Mar 2012, 02:57 UTC reply to this comment

This sounds like the "saccharin" scare. Coco Cola has already ruined their original coke with corn sugar substitutes and call it "classic". It's a classical bad drink now and not to be imitated. Of course the younger generation growing up with this so called classical instead of calling it "original" don't know the difference and coke waited it out. They saved plenty on the switch.


Comment #7 by: curly on 25 Mar 2012, 23:38 UTC reply to this comment

thank you for exposing this to the public it is time these company's are made to change their products to more healthy procducts for the people that have bought their products for years and kept them alive and well.

Copyright © 2001-2013 Softpedia. Contact/Tip us at

WindowsGamesDriversMacLinuxScriptsMobileHandheldNews

SUBMIT PROGRAM   |   ADVERTISE   |   GET HELP   |   SEND US FEEDBACK   |   RSS FEEDS   |   UPDATE YOUR SOFTWARE   |   ROMANIAN FORUM