Shock Study, Some Soft Drinks Contain Cancer-Causing Chemical Cola-Caramel Coloring: 4-MEI

HOLLYWOOD

Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
22,314
Checkout PEPSI's response below. BTW, The average person that drinks colas, it's more than the "100 milliliters" PEPSI claims, which converted, equates to 3.38 ounces... I wonder, has anyone ever purchase a 3.38 ounce can of COKE or PEPSI? Wondering how those 7/11 "Big Gulp" cola drinkers feel?

PS: PEPSI to invest $5 Billion in Mexico... how much you want to bet, they'll be closing some U.S. locations after those plants come online.

Shock Study: Some Soft Drinks Contain Cancer-Causing Chemical

Carcinogen Known As 4-MEI Has Been Found In Caramel Coloring In Colas, Others

January 23, 2014 6:22 PM
View Comments

4-MEI, Cancer, carcinogen, COLA, Consumer Reports, Dr. Max Gomez, Soft drinks, Trending
NEW YORK (CBSNewYork)
– There was a warning issued Thursday about the soft drinks you and your children may be consuming every day.

Consumer Reports says some of them contain a possible cancer-causing chemical, CBS 2’s Dr. Max Gomez reported.
The issue is with the caramel coloring in many soft drinks. It is what gives them their brown color. Some contain a possible human carcinogen.
Why is it in there? Can it be removed and what can you do to protect yourself? Here’s what you need to know:

Cola is one of the most popular soft drinks in the country, but now a study from Consumer Reports says that the caramel coloring additive that gives cola — and many other soft drinks — its brown color, can contain a harmful chemical called 4-methylimidazole, or 4-MEI.

“It was in fact … definitely causes cancer in animal studies. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has also classified 4-MEI as a possible human carcinogen,” Dr. Urvashi Rangan said.
As Dr. Gomez reported, 4-MEI is a byproduct when caramel color is manufactured, but it’s not in all caramel coloring and amounts vary widely in caramel-colored drinks, even when the same brands were tested just a few months apart.
“Coke came in at a negligible cancer level at one can of Coke. That said, we found other manufacturers — like Pepsi — really quite a lot higher than Coke,” Dr. Rangan said. “Malta Goya, which is a Hispanic soft drink, was actually at 300 or more micrograms per 12-ounce serving.”

There’s no flavor reason for the caramel coloring. It’s strictly cosmetic. So California recently required warning labels on any food or beverages containing more than 29 micrograms of 4-MEI. But there are no such federal requirements, so your only way to avoid 4-MEI is to look for caramel coloring on the label, Dr. Gomez reported.


Pepsi responded to the Consumer Reports study on Thursday, saying the average amount of diet soda consumed by people is just 100 milliliters. For that reason the company believes that Pepsi One does not require cancer-risk warning labels.


One hundred milliliters is less than a third of a can of soda. A full can does exceed the California limit.

CBS 2 contacted Goya Foods on Thursday, but it declined to comment on the Consumer Reports study.
The variability in 4-MEI levels comes from how the caramel color is manufactured and who supplies the coloring to the soft drink maker. So it’s possible to minimize the 4-MEI in caramel coloring.
By the way, drinks labeled “natural” also contained caramel coloring. So make sure to read the ingredients.
 
Last edited:
I'm a former "Big Gulp" drinker, only stopped because there is no longer a 7/11 within walking distance of my house;) I don't really feel bad. The OP says "Cancer Causing" but there are no specifics about how it causes cancer, what the odds are, etc. Way I look at it, I'm eventually going to die, so what?
 
I'm a former "Big Gulp" drinker, only stopped because there is no longer a 7/11 within walking distance of my house;) I don't really feel bad. The OP says "Cancer Causing" but there are no specifics about how it causes cancer, what the odds are, etc. Way I look at it, I'm eventually going to die, so what?

Yeah, I agree. And the science from the mainstream media is almost always an over-reaction, and usually about half right. This probably has more to do with Michelle Obama's war on obesity than it does anything else.

Really - read this:
Coke came in at a negligible cancer level at one can of Coke
- Seriously, WTF does that even mean? The article itself clearly indicates that the chemical in question hasn't even yet been determined to be a carcinogen.
 
I'm a former "Big Gulp" drinker, only stopped because there is no longer a 7/11 within walking distance of my house;) I don't really feel bad. The OP says "Cancer Causing" but there are no specifics about how it causes cancer, what the odds are, etc. Way I look at it, I'm eventually going to die, so what?


Here's the Consumer Report's testing/coverage: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/...ealth-risk-that-may-be-in-your-soda/index.htm
Caramel color: The health risk that may be in your soda

It’s the most common coloring in foods and drinks—and it can contain a potential carcinogen. Here’s what Consumer Reports found when it tested soft drinks that have caramel color.

Published: January 23, 2014 06:00 AM
Caramel color, added to many soft drinks and some foods to turn them brown, may sound harmless, even appetizing. But in no way does it resemble real caramel. Some types of this artificial coloring contain a potentially carcinogenic chemical called4-methylimidazole (4-MeI). Under California’s Proposition 65 law, any food or beverage sold in the state that exposes consumers to more than 29 micrograms of 4-MeI per day is supposed to carry a health-warning label. In recent Consumer Reports’ tests, each of the 12-ounce samples of Pepsi One and Malta Goya had more than 29 micrograms per can or bottle. While we cannot say that this violates California's Prop 65, we believe that these levels are too high, and we have asked the California Attorney General to investigate.
Caramel color is the single most used food coloring in the world, according to a 2013 report from market research firms Mintel and Leatherhead Food Research. “There’s no reason why consumers should be exposed to an avoidable and unnecessary risk that can stem from coloring food brown,” says Urvashi Rangan, Ph.D., toxicologist and executive director of Consumer Reports’ Food Safety & Sustainability Center. “Manufacturers have lower 4-MeI alternatives available to them. Ideally there would be no 4-MeI in food.”

The risks
In 2007, a federal government study concluded that 4-MeI caused cancer in mice and the International Agency for Research on Cancer determined the chemical to be “possibly carcinogenic to humans” in 2011. There’s no federal limit for levels of 4-MeI in foods and beverages, but as of January 7, 2012 California requires manufacturers to label a product sold in the state with a cancer warning if it exposes consumers to more than 29 micrograms of 4-MeI per day. In this case, the exposure comes from consumption.
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment used 29 micrograms as the cut off point because that’s the level they determined poses a one in 100,000 risk of cancer—that is, no more than one excess cancer case per 100,000 people who are exposed to that amount daily for a lifetime.
Consumer Reports’ experts think even that risk is too high. “It’s possible to get more than 29 micrograms of 4-MeI in one can of some of the drinks we tested. And even if your choice of soft drink contains half that amount, many people have more than one can per day,” says Rangan. “Given that coloring is deliberately added to foods, the amount of 4-MeI in them should pose a negligible risk, which is defined as no more than one excess cancer case in 1 million people.” To meet that risk level, Consumer Reports’ experts say a soft drink would need to contain about 3 micrograms or less per can.
CRO_CFA_HealthNews_Carmel_SodaGroupShot_1-14.jpg

These brands of soft drinks all contained varying levels of 4-MeI.

How we tested
Consumer Reports* tested 81 cans and bottles of various popular brands of soft drinks from five manufacturers between April and September 2013. We purchased the products from stores in California and the New York metropolitan region. In December 2013, we bought and tested 29 new samples, again from the same areas, of those brands that had initially tested above 29 micrograms per can or bottle in either location.


What we found
While our study was not large enough to recommend one brand over another, both rounds of testing found that the level of 4-MeI in the samples of Pepsi One and Malta Goya purchased in both locations exceeded 29 micrograms per can or bottle. The products we purchased in California did not have a cancer-risk warning label.

In our initial testing, some of the other brands we bought in California had average levels around or below 29 micrograms per can, but the New York area samples of those same brands tested much higher. In our second test, though, the levels in the New York samples had come down. For example, regular Pepsi from the New York area averaged 174 micrograms in the first test and 32 micrograms in the second. “The fact that we found lower amounts of 4-MeI in our last round of tests suggests that some manufacturers may be taking steps to reduce levels, which would be a step in the right direction,” says Dr. Rangan
On average, three of the brands—Coke, Diet Coke, and Coke Zero—came in under 5 micrograms per can in our tests, a level Consumer Reports’ experts believe is more acceptable. Sprite, a clear soda that was tested as a control, showed no significant levels of 4-MeI.


CRO_CFA_CaramelColor_CHART_1-14.jpg


What manufacturers say
Because California’s regulations took effect two years ago, we contacted PepsiCo and Goya in early January 2014 to ask whether their products sold in California were in compliance with the state’s law. A spokesperson for PepsiCo said in an e-mail, “When the regulatory requirements changed in California, PepsiCo moved immediately to meet the new requirements.” She also said reformulated products containing lower levels of 4-MeI would be available nationwide by February 2014. Goya did not provide a response to our questions.
After we informed PepsiCo of our test results, the company issued a statement that said that Proposition 65 is based on per day exposure and not exposure per can. It also cited government consumption data that shows that the average amount of diet soda consumed by people who drink it is 100 milliliters per day, or less than a third of a 12-ounce can. For that reason, they believe that Pepsi One does not require cancer-risk warning labels—even if the amount of 4-MeI in a single can exceeds 29 micrograms.
Consumer Reports says there is analysis of government data that shows higher levels of daily consumption of soft drinks generally. "No matter how much consumers drink they don't expect their beverages to have a potential carcinogen in them. And we don't think 4-MeI should be in foods at all. Our tests of Coke samples show that it is possible to get to much lower levels," says Rangan.


What Consumer Reports is doing
Based on our results, Consumers Union, the policy and action arm of Consumer Reports, is taking several actions. First, we are alerting the California Attorney General’s office of our test findings regarding Pepsi One and Malta Goya. We are also petitioning the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to set a federal standard for 4-MeI and in the meantime to require manufacturers to list the type of caramel color they use on their products’ ingredient lists. That’s important because there are four types of caramel coloring. Only the two made with ammonia compounds can contain 4-MeI. However, manufacturers can use the general term “artificial color” interchangeably with “caramel color.” “Europe has labeling requirements and consumers in the United States should have the right to make an informed choice about what they are drinking and eating,” says Dr. Rangan.
In a statement from the agency, the FDA said it does not believe that 4-MeI from caramel color at levels currently in food pose a risk. However, they appreciated Consumer Reports’ tests and are currently doing their own tests of foods, including sodas, for 4-MeI. They are also reviewing new safety data on 4-MeI to determine what, if any, regulatory action needs to be taken.

CRO_CFA_HealthNews_Carmel_PepsiOne_Ingrediants_1-14.jpg

To avoid 4-MeI, check ingredient lists for "caramel color" or "artificial color."

What you can do
To express your concern about caramel color in food to the FDA, go to Consumers Union’s website NotInMyFood.org.
If you want to limit your exposure to 4-MeI, for now the only option is to consume few if any products that list "caramel color" or "artificial color" on their labels. “Clearly, it’s feasible for manufacturers to reduce levels of 4-MeI in their products right now,” says Dr. Rangan. “But until a federal standard is set or there is more transparency in labeling, you may want to read ingredient lists carefully.”
 
Posting the whole article is a violation of the forum rules. Not to mention international copyright law.


Globalism at work. This smacks of the UN thing (I forget the name) to control the worls food supply under a single set of guidelines.

Europe has labeling requirements and consumers in the United States should have the right to make an informed choice about what they are drinking and eating,” says Dr. Rangan.

Europe has a different set of standards. They ban anything that makes them feel uncomfortable. Here in the US, we only ban things that are proven to cause harm.

And Consumer's Union is a huge proponent of government control of everything.

Look for Pepsi Clear to make a come back soon.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I agree. And the science from the mainstream media is almost always an over-reaction, and usually about half right. This probably has more to do with Michelle Obama's war on obesity than it does anything else.

Really - read this: - Seriously, WTF does that even mean? The article itself clearly indicates that the chemical in question hasn't even yet been determined to be a carcinogen.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not arguing that soda is good for me or that anyone "should" drink it (Even though I do.) And I am overweight. I'm just saying that I'm not convinced its going to give me cancer.

And yeah, that was really, really vague. A can of coke how often? In a lifetime? A day? An hour? And what percentage chance is "negligible?"

I agree with you that is "War on Obesity" stuff.

Posting the whole article is a violation of the forum rules. Not to mention international copyright law.


Globalism at work. This smacks of the UN thing (I forget the name) to control the worls food supply under a single set of guidelines.



Europe has a different set of standards. They ban anything that makes them feel uncomfortable. Here in the US, we only ban things that are proven to cause harm.

And Consumer's Union is a huge proponent of government control of everything.

Look for Pepsi Clear to make a come back soon.

What is "Pepsi Clear"?
 
Posting the whole article is a violation of the forum rules. Not to mention international copyright law.


Let me ask this. What if I have permission from the source to post an entire article? Then what? As I recall, this rule was placed into function because some platforms didn't like this happening and communicated their concern. But then because of these few platforms, we must then conform to a collectivist means of dialogue? I can tell you that I have specific permission from at least one global news source to post entire articles. In that regard, telling me that I can't because there is too much information equates to censorship.
 
Last edited:
Yes, as I thought. The word "potential" is key for the critical thinkers, while the word "chemical" is tailor-made for the people susceptible to the cult of the fear-mongering. I can't wait to see the 50 shrieking articles that DonnaY will post from Natural News and the like in the next few days. (Yes, I actually can.)

Here's Wikipedia's discussion of the various studies done on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4-Methylimidazole#Health_concerns

Concern has arisen about the presence of 4-MEI in caramel color (which is the most-used food and beverage coloring), typically at a concentration between 50 and 700 ppm.[6] Dark beers and common brands of cola drinks may contain more than 100 μg of this compound per 12-ounce serving.[1]

At very high doses (360 mg/kg of body weight), 4-methylimidazole is a convulsant for rabbits, mice and chicks, and was the likely cause of acute intoxication observed in cattle fed with ammoniated, sugar-containing cattle feed supplements in the 1960s.[6] However, several studies found no ill effect in rats and dogs for the concentrations found in caramel coloring.[6] A study even found 4-MEI had an anticarcinogenic effect on rats.[1][7] It has been claimed, however, that the reduction in tumor rates seen by Chan and others were due to lower body weight rather than a true anticarcinogenic effect.[1]


A 2007 study by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) found that high doses of 4-MEI were carcinogenic in mice and in female rats.[8] The same study found no unusual lung tumors in mice and reduced tumors in rats.[9] Similar effects were observed for the isomer 2-methylimidazole, which is not found in caramel coloring.[10] Dose-related, statistically significant decreases in multiple tumors were observed in both male and female rats exposed to 4-MEI in the NTP bioassay. 4-MEI was associated with a 25-fold decrease in the incidence of mammary tumors among high-dose females.[9] NTP noted briefly that the decreases in certain tumors, including mammary tumors, were greater than could be attributed to body weight alone.[8] Reduced body weight offers a partial explanation for the reduction in tumors, but does not appear to be the primary cause of the decreased tumor incidences, indicating 4-MEI itself may possess an ability to prevent tumor formation.[9] In response to high 4-MEI levels used in studies, US FDA spokesperson Doug Karas stated, "[a] person would have to drink more than a thousand cans of soda in a day to match the doses administered in studies that showed links to cancer in rodents.” [11]


Based on these studies, caramel coloring of all types are considered safe and are approved by many leading regulatory agencies around the world, such as the European Food Safety Authority(EFSA), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) and, most recently, the Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency(ANVISA). The European Union requires class III caramels to contain <200 mg/kg 4-MeI and class IV caramels to contain <250 mg/kg 4-MEI (color adjusted).[12][13]


In January 2011, California added 4-MEI to its list of probable carcinogens and stipulated 29 μg per day as the "No Significant Risk Level" intake.[14] This is considerably less than the mean intake of 4-MEI by regular cola drinkers.[1] The food industry has strongly opposed that decision, as it implies the need for additional warning labels on many products, and it disputes the validity of the NTP study.[1] According to Dr James Coughlin, a toxicologist who studies animal carcinogens, the risk posed by 4-MEI is even smaller than this government estimate suggests. In order for humans to reach the equivalent of even the lowest cancer-causing dose in mice, a woman would have to drink 37,000 cans (12 oz) a day for the rest of her life, and a man would have to drink 95,000 cans a day. These figures come from a slightly more conservative study of colas done last year that found an average of 130 μg of 4-MEI per can as opposed to the 138 μg found by CSPI.[15]


In March 2012, both Coca-Cola and Pepsi announced they had their caramel color suppliers modify their manufacturing processes to meet the new California standard; as of the announcement, the changes had already been made for beverages sold in California.[16] The recipe is not changing in Europe, so the 4-MEI level will remain the same.[17][18]


In July 2013, the Center for Environmental Health issued a press release claiming that an independent study "found little or no 4-MeI in nine out of ten Coke products, but showed high levels of 4-MeI in all ten Pepsi products. Soon after the report was made public, PepsiCo stated that their soft drinks will have reduced amounts of 4-MeI "by February 2014."[19]

But nothing including that, will spare us from the cult of the True Believers frm posting diatribe reminding us why we should seek the truth from Natural News, and make our government start doing things the way that Europe does.
 
Last edited:
All these soda's are bad news...it's best to keep away from them.

Of course. But they taste good. Some people are health fanatics and will only make healthy decisions no matter what the situation, and that's fine. I'm not one of those. Sometimes I'll drink something because it tastes good even though its bad for me. And that's my choice to make.
 
Of course. But they taste good. Some people are health fanatics and will only make healthy decisions no matter what the situation, and that's fine. I'm not one of those. Sometimes I'll drink something because it tastes good even though its bad for me. And that's my choice to make.

Then by all means-- knock yourself out!
 
Don't get me wrong: I'm not arguing that soda is good for me or that anyone "should" drink it (Even though I do.) And I am overweight. I'm just saying that I'm not convinced its going to give me cancer.

And yeah, that was really, really vague. A can of coke how often? In a lifetime? A day? An hour? And what percentage chance is "negligible?"

I agree with you that is "War on Obesity" stuff.



What is "Pepsi Clear"?

My bad, it was called "Crystal Pepsi." Circa 1993:

 
Back
Top