Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday September 03 2015, @10:52AM   Printer-friendly
from the Carbonation-or-Caffeine? dept.

Carbonated beverages are associated with out-of-hospital cardiac arrests of cardiac origin, according to results from the All-Japan Utstein Registry presented for the first time today at ESC Congress. The study in nearly 800,000 patients suggests that limiting consumption of carbonated beverages may be beneficial for health.

"Some epidemiologic studies have shown a positive correlation between the consumption of soft drinks and the incidence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and stroke, while other reports have demonstrated that the intake of green tea and coffee reduced the risk and mortality of CVD," said principal investigator Professor Keijiro Saku, Dean and professor of cardiology at Fukuoka University in Japan. "Carbonated beverages, or sodas, have frequently been demonstrated to increase the risk of metabolic syndrome and CVD, such as subclinical cardiac remodeling and stroke. However, until now the association between drinking large amounts of carbonated beverages and fatal CVD, or out-of-hospital cardiac arrests (OHCA) of cardiac origin, was unclear."

In other words, put the soda down and back away slowly... Is there a safer way to make our beverages bubbly?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by q.kontinuum on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:02AM

    by q.kontinuum (532) on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:02AM (#231666) Journal

    I wonder what effect carbonated water would have. According to the article, "The acid in carbonated beverages might play an important role in this association." The article also points out that they just found a correlation, not necessarily a causation yet.

    --
    Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Dunbal on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:52AM

    by Dunbal (3515) on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:52AM (#231679)

    Fromt TFA:

    Expenditures on other beverages, including green tea, black tea, coffee, cocoa, fruit or vegetable juice, fermented milk beverage, milk and mineral water were not significantly associated with OHCAs of cardiac origin.

    This makes me wonder if they sufficiently analyzed overall diet. Carbonated beverage "excess" could just be a marker of overall poor dietary choices not the cause of the problem.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:33PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:33PM (#231719)

      I agree. Frankly soda is huge cocktail of stuff. Several different kinds of acid, sugars, oils, caffeine, phosphorus. Just getting rid of sugar spike alone helps with your diet. For the past 2 days I am leaving them alone (1.5 pounds down but that could just be variation). Hopefully I can stop. I avg 2-4 cans a day when I am into them.

      Lost about 15 pounds earlier this year by cutting them out of my diet (5 months). Put it all back on when they are :( Even the diet ones cause a 'sugar spike' by the way they manipulate the other sugars in your body. I cant stand coffee or tea. So water it is for me. Nice side effects are I do not feel really tired all the time and just mildly tired. I also sleep pretty good thru the night now due to low acid reflux.

      These things are dessert drinks. We treat them as primary drinks.

      • (Score: 2) by ledow on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:46PM

        by ledow (5567) on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:46PM (#231807) Homepage

        I drink only carbonated drinks, and only full-sugar carbonated drinks, and only full-caffeinated carbonated drinks and I'm constantly remarked upon as being "skinny" (I also have no trouble sleeping, never nap during the day, and don't have a problem with alertness or tiredness - over or under). My situation is unchanged for nearly 20 years.

        Again, just because YOU can't drink them without putting on weight, why should it affect my choice too?

        And, actually, the carbon dioxide dissolves in water to form carbonic acid, so ANY carbonated drink will be acidic. However, as pointed out, your stomach is also highly acidic. Acidity on its own is not a problem, its the strength, volume and frequency, and how it interacts in a particular person. Same as the sugar. (Same with your teeth... any sugar is bad for your teeth but what matters is length of exposure and strength of that exposure. Starch from, say, crisps (potato chips) is a sugar too... and if a bit lodges in your teeth for a few minutes, that's MUCH WORSE for your teeth than downing a whole can of carbonated drink in one go - presuming you don't swill it around your mouth).

        However, I'll be buggered if I could work out how 2-4 cans of any carbonated drink contains ANYWHERE NEAR enough to make you put or, sustain, or lose, an extra 15 pounds. That's just insane mathematics, and correlative effects.

        Maybe it's more complicated than "This drink is bad" and more like "You have a body not capable of handling X foodstuff". Like gluten-intolerance, etc. - why should that affect the people who can eat normal bread? People are inherently biased against admitting they have a weakness, whether that's mentally, physically or - in this case - probably gastrally.

        P.S. Not visited, nor needed to, a dentist in 15 years nor a GP for any general health problem in my life (injury, yes, and things like ingrowing toenails, yes... but pass all the medicals every time). Can't even tell you the last time I took a tablet for anything at all.

        • (Score: 3, Insightful) by RobotLove on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:53PM

          by RobotLove (3304) on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:53PM (#231810)

          This post is idiocy. Just because you can find an outlier (in this case, yourself) doesn't mean it's a general rule. We have very solid science for what sugar and acid do to a body. Your personal experiences doesn't nullify that.

          Have you been in a car accident and been saved by your seat belt? No? Then seat belts should not be required for anyone! Also, I know a man who smoked until he was 90 without ill effect. Clearly smoking is not dangerous.

          • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 03 2015, @04:04PM

            by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 03 2015, @04:04PM (#231818) Homepage Journal

            "Then seat belts should not be required for anyone!"

            Actually - that is correct. If the nanny state is looking out for everyone, you can expect that eventually everyone will be dependent on the nanny state.

            Seat belt use should be voluntary.

            --
            "Trust the science" -- Tony Fauci and his army of psycophants
            • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @04:15PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @04:15PM (#231828)

              > Seat belt use should be voluntary.

              It is voluntary, just stay off those nanny-state roads and stick to the roads on your private property and you will have no trouble with the law.

              • (Score: 1, Disagree) by khallow on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:46PM

                by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Thursday September 03 2015, @11:46PM (#232036) Journal
                I don't have any problem with people paying for their poor life choices and still using public property. The act of making something public should greatly reduce our power to control what people do with it.
        • (Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Thursday September 03 2015, @07:06PM

          by opinionated_science (4031) on Thursday September 03 2015, @07:06PM (#231901)

          Anecdotes about how an individual consumes a certain diet and doesn't incur certain symptoms is of no scientific value. Only populations with measured diets and activities are useful, because there *is* a different in our personal genetics and how we adapt to our environments. You have a point about denial...!

          The problem is not the "can of soda" per se. It is usually used as a quantity of calorific value that is relatable to a non-technical audience.

          If you are consuming 150 kCals of food more than your body needs, then by definition it will get stored. In mammals this is body fat.

          Hence, if you consume "the equivalent" of 140 kCals/day (12oz coke) that is 1lb of fat every 25 days. So 12lbs/year.

          The FDA figures for daily calorie consumption are almost complete fiction. If you are overweight, you are eating too much. That's physics, although it can be hard to accept for some.The optimistic FDA published figures have probably lead to the general problem of under-estimating calorie consumption, and over-estimating exercise exertion.

          In 100% of cases, changing the ratio of diet/exerise will change your bodyfat composition, assuming there is not a prevailing physiological condition (very rare mitochondria disorders), and if you are physically able.
          But sugar and in particular HFCS is poison. This makes it much more difficult to judge calorie value than, say, a piece of fruit.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 04 2015, @07:27AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 04 2015, @07:27AM (#232161)

            If you are consuming 150 kCals of food more than your body needs, then by definition it will get stored. In mammals this is body fat.

            Perhaps in your part of the world. Over here we invented something called "the toilet", where you can go crap out excessive stuff.

            How much of the excessive energy your body stores and how much goes straight to crap depends very much on the individual. That's why some people can eat like three regular people, consider "exercise" a threat on par with "murder", and yet stay skinny.

    • (Score: 2) by opinionated_science on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:49PM

      by opinionated_science (4031) on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:49PM (#231727)

      Yes I thought that too. When I hear "carbonated" I think "Junk food". A poor article that does not make clear that it is the *sugar* causing the problems... The acid in human stomachs is several orders of magnitude stronger than soda water...
      Phosphoric acid (in cola drinks), is probably not great...

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 04 2015, @07:30AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 04 2015, @07:30AM (#232162)

        They did, however, make it clear that the study did not show causation, only correlation. So leaving out the part about sugar being the cause is the correct thing to do, as this study did not show that.

    • (Score: 2) by Gravis on Thursday September 03 2015, @09:03PM

      by Gravis (4596) on Thursday September 03 2015, @09:03PM (#231970)

      Carbonated beverage "excess" could just be a marker of overall poor dietary choices not the cause of the problem.

      anything beyond a few sips a day of "carbonated beverages" is excessive. a 12 oz can of Coke has 800% your daily value of sugar.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:12PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @01:12PM (#231712)

    Looking for causation is a snipe hunt. Science is about finding simple formulas that can summarize the relationships between many observations. The more focused on causation, the less productive the field of research and more pseudosciency it is.

    • (Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday September 03 2015, @05:55PM

      by Dunbal (3515) on Thursday September 03 2015, @05:55PM (#231874)

      Science is about finding simple formulas

      No, that's mathematics. At to some extent, statistics.

      Science is about finding the answer to a question, and demonstrating a logical answer with experimentation that is designed in a way that anyone can reproduce the results. While a formula may be useful as a tool to show a relationship and to predict and calculate, science is about the "why" behind the formula and always will be.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @07:53PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @07:53PM (#231927)

        I have not as yet been able to discover the reason for these properties of gravity from phenomena, and I do not feign hypotheses. For whatever is not deduced from the phenomena must be called a hypothesis; and hypotheses, whether metaphysical or physical, or based on occult qualities, or mechanical, have no place in experimental philosophy. In this philosophy particular propositions are inferred from the phenomena, and afterwards rendered general by induction.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypotheses_non_fingo [wikipedia.org]

        As to the scientific method, we saw in our first chapter that it consists in the careful and often laborious classification l of facts, in the comparison of their relationships and sequences, and finally in the discovery by aid of the disciplined imagination of a brief statement or formula, which in a few words resumes a wide range of facts. Such a formula, we have seen, is termed a scientific law. The object served by the discovery of such laws is the economy of thought ; the suitable association of conceptions drawn from stored sense-impressions, permits the fitting exertion to follow with the minimum of thought upon the receipt of an immediate sense-impression. The knowledge of scientific law enables us to replace or supplement mechanical association, or instinct, by mental association, or thought. It is the forethought, by aid of which man in a far higher degree than other animals is able to make the fitting exertion on the receipt of a novel group of sense-impressions.

        https://archive.org/details/grammarofscience00pearuoft [archive.org]

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @08:19PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @08:19PM (#231939)

        Actually, I don't think science can ever be about "why" since it is not possible to ever prove something is true. Science can do "not why" (disprove) to some extent, but never answer "why".

  • (Score: 4, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:15PM

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Thursday September 03 2015, @03:15PM (#231788)

    If it is just the carbonation, then a comparison with fruit juices should be illuminating - orange juice is just as acidic, almost as sugary, but not carbonated. Cranberry juice keeps the sugar, but switches from acidic to basic.

    --
    My karma ran over your dogma.
    • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday September 04 2015, @03:20PM

      by Immerman (3985) on Friday September 04 2015, @03:20PM (#232282)

      Okay, you caught my attention there about the cranberry juice, but Google says otherwise. Cranberry juice is used for urinary infections because the low pH (high acidity) makes the urine acidic, killing infection.

      • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday September 07 2015, @09:28PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday September 07 2015, @09:28PM (#233446)

        Hmmm... my mother, the biology teacher, had me misinformed on this point for the last 40 years.

        Thanks!

        --
        My karma ran over your dogma.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @04:03PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @04:03PM (#231817)

    > I wonder what effect carbonated water would have.

    None. The article itself says that "mineral water" had no association. Mineral water is just carbonated water with some extra minerals like calcium, magnesium, bicarbonate, etc. One significant difference between mineral water and plain carbonated water is acidity. Carbonation creates carbonic acid which lowers the pH of the water to around 4.5 while the minerals, particularly bicarbonate tends to buffer the acidity so that mineral water tends to much closer to a neutral pH of 7.

    That probably doesn't make much difference to your bloodstream, but it does make a difference to your teeth - low pH drinks promote tooth decay because the bacteria that eats your enamel thrives in an acidic environment. So mineral water is better than plain sparkling water aka seltzer.

    I only drink mineral water because I am addicted to bubbles in my drinks. Flat water is just too boring. I built a poor-man's carbonation system [popsci.com] that lets me carbonate 2 liters for a couple of pennies. Here's an 8-minute video [youtube.com] from another guy who did the same thing. Unlike him, I bought my co2 tank new rather than scavenge because you can't know if the tank has containments like lubricating oil in it. Always get your co2 refills from a place that does fills for restaurants or medical users because they will keep containments out of the refill process.

    Here are the ingredients list for homemade mineral water clones. [khymos.org] San Pellegrino is particularly simple to clone, just 1 teaspoon of Burton's Salts [amazon.com] per liter.

    • (Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Thursday September 03 2015, @08:10PM

      by q.kontinuum (532) on Thursday September 03 2015, @08:10PM (#231934) Journal

      Mineral water is not necessarily carbonated. But carbonated water is a carbonated drink.

      I built a poor-man's carbonation system that

      Now, that is interesting. Just yesterday I was looking for something like that. I have a Sodastream, the refill for the CO2 containers are insanely expensive (more than buying the carbonated water in the long run). Alternatively, I'm looking into an adapter to refill the Sodastream CO2 container myself from a bigger, cheaper CO2 bottle

      --
      Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @08:30PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 03 2015, @08:30PM (#231945)

        > Alternatively, I'm looking into an adapter to refill the Sodastream CO2 container myself from a bigger, cheaper CO2 bottle

        I tried that when I started. Or rather I bought an adapter for the big tank and just hooked it directly to the sodastream so I didn't have to dick around with the paintball sized tank.

        Downside is that the sodastream mechanism is too leaky too carbonate strongly and is very wasteful of co2. Upside of the shaker is you can get higher carbonation levels and a lot more liters per tank by doing it with the shaker because it has nearly zero waste. Also helps with upper body strength - I shake it a lot more vigorously than the guy in the video.

        Downside of the shaker is that you have to shake it so it is less convenient, but that is mitigated by doing 2 liters at a time instead of whatever size bottle your sodastream has. I bought three of those carbonator caps, 1 of them was leaky from day 1, the other two are fine 3 three later and I do about 4 liters per day. The leaky one is not leaky enough to matter if you intend to pour a drink immediately after shaking, I just can't leave it on as a cap over night.