Coca cola gets hit with tobacco like lawsuit

[Darsithis]

shity parrents who buy thier children all the soda they want. And then complain when they find out its bad for them. Fucking parrents should lose thier children if they try and get in on this.

That's quite an overreaction

[Zeta333]

That's quite an overreaction

If a parrent sues a soda company because thier kid got fat off of the soda, its entirely the parrents fault and they arnt fit to be parrents.

[Underverse]

Pretty much any simple carb source can be a source of obesity and diabetes. Fruit, fruit juices, cakes, cookies, candy, soda, enriched flour products, etc, why single out Coke? There are more sugary products directly marketed at kids than this.

Triumphant trial lawyers likely would not just stop at soda, but would also attack other beverages they deemed unhealthy -- energy drinks, anyone? -- as well as processed food manufacturers, candy, ice cream, and snack makers.

Easy targets first.

- - - Updated - - -

There's absolutely no way that soda could ever be put on the same level as cigarettes, and it's odd to even compare them.

Caffeine is addictive, sure, but there's multiple sources you can obtain it from, and it's not nearly to the same degree as Nicotine.
Also, there's no such thing as second hand drinking, no one around you is being harmed by you chugging a soda.

Also like pointed out, cigarettes are pretty much instantly harmful, while soda you need to overindulged in for harm.

That's mostly the doing of the article.

Put down that soda! According to a lawsuit filed against Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO), the carbonated drink is just as dangerous to your health as a cigarette. Well, maybe not quite, but the soda giant and the American Beverage Association (ABA) are being sued by consumer activists who say their actions are just as bad as what the tobacco giants did, and they should be similarly punished.

The suing activists are arguing that soda companies took steps to obfuscate the impact of consuming sugary drinks on health, among other things listed later in the article. They're not arguing that it's as unhealthy for you as cigarettes.

[Beet]

Reposting this without the bait because I for one am very happy to see this

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compa...T8M?li=BBmkt5R

I am absolutely sick of seeing our children poisoned. Absolutely unacceptable. Hopefully someone goes after big pharma soon enough.

Not surprised to hear you're having to repost this without "bait". This is hilarious. Soda on the same level as tobacco, my ass.

When do we finally put responsibility on parents? If you let your kid drink coke all day and only coke then you're a shitty parent. It's not cokes fault. Coke isn't advertised as a health drink. This is just all kinds of hilarity.

- - - Updated - - -

If a parrent sues a soda company because thier kid got fat off of the soda, its entirely the parrents fault and they arnt fit to be parrents.

Says who? You? Who's gonna take care of the kids then? You? Making your kids fat isn't enough of a reason to remove kids from their parents care. It's sad and it's the parents fault(not "parrents"), but it's not such a bad thing that warrants removal.

[Underverse]

And to be clear, there is ample evidence that soda companies did indeed campaign against scientific evidence showing the negative impacts of soda consumption, even funding their own studies that argued that soda consumption was totally fine and had no significant health impacts.

This is largely what this is about - large corporations hiding the danger of their products from consumers. And this is where the parallel to tobacco companies is being drawn, because these industries shared common strategies.

On a related note, we might know now that soda is pretty bad for you. But that wasn't always the case.

Rather than fixate on calories, the idea of energy balance invites weight-conscious Americans to focus more on exercise and eat what they want. Earlier this year, in partnership with Pepsi, Dr. Pepper, and the American Beverage Association, Coke launched “Mixify”—a lavish multi-platform campaign that pitches kids on this very same idea.
“Coke, Dr Pepper and Pepsi understand that balancing your mix of foods, drinks and physical activities can get a little tricky,” the website says, next to the hashtag “Realtalk,” the first of dozens of youthful details. “That’s where Mixify comes in.”

The site bills itself as “a balance wingman,” with Mixify “bringing you new combinations to keep your mix fresh and your body right.” It suggests that kids mix “lazy days with something light,” and follow “sweaty workouts with whatever you’re craving.” And if you follow that advice, it concludes, you’ll be “feeling snazzier than the emoji of the dancing lady in red.”

That’s misleading at best, according to numerous public health experts. Many take moral and scientific issue with Coca-Cola’s approach, comparing it to the old Big Tobacco technique of muddying the science to keep the customer in the dark about what their habit is likely to do to them.

- - - Updated - - -

Not surprised to hear you're having to repost this without "bait". This is hilarious. Soda on the same level as tobacco, my ass.

Maybe you should read the article.

When do we finally put responsibility on parents? If you let your kid drink coke all day and only coke then you're a shitty parent. It's not cokes fault. Coke isn't advertised as a health drink. This is just all kinds of hilarity.

Coke advertises their product as part of a healthy lifestyle.

[Zeta333]

Not surprised to hear you're having to repost this without "bait". This is hilarious. Soda on the same level as tobacco, my ass.

When do we finally put responsibility on parents? If you let your kid drink coke all day and only coke then you're a shitty parent. It's not cokes fault. Coke isn't advertised as a health drink. This is just all kinds of hilarity.

- - - Updated - - -



Says who? You? Who's gonna take care of the kids then? You? Making your kids fat isn't enough of a reason to remove kids from their parents care. It's sad and it's the parents fault(not "parrents"), but it's not such a bad thing that warrants removal.

making your kids fat, them blaming it and sueing the soda company is about as big of a sign as an unfit parrent as i can think of.

[Underverse]

making your kids fat, them blaming it and sueing the soda company is about as big of a sign as an unfit parrent as i can think of.

That's not what's happening here.

[zenkai]

Reposting this without the bait because I for one am very happy to see this

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/compa...T8M?li=BBmkt5R

I am absolutely sick of seeing our children poisoned. Absolutely unacceptable. Hopefully someone goes after big pharma soon enough.

As much as I agree coke is poison, it comes to personal responsibility. You can't feed your kids coke and McDonalds everdyay and complain they are fat, it starts with YOU the parent.

- - - Updated - - -

That's not what's happening here.

That's exactly what is happening. My kid isn't fat, I hardly ever kept soda in the house.

[Underverse]

That's exactly what is happening. My kid isn't fat, I hardly ever kept soda in the house.

They're not suing soda companies over making people fat. Read the article.

[zenkai]

They're not suing soda companies over making people fat. Read the article.

In a sense they are, they are going after Soda, saying oh they target children and that's why children are fat. This is like the Tobacco thing, everyone knew smoking is bad, everyone knows soda is bad, only a dumbass think either is not dangerous.

[Mad_Murdock]

Poisoned? How the hell is anyone being poisoned by a soft drink??

I would only support such a thing, if like the tobacco industry it was proven to show they added extra addicting things to it. Wasn't it ammonia they were adding to cigs? If they are lying about the ingredients or the amount of each, they should be fined and I'd tolerate an overall lawsuit

Outside of that, this is a parent issue or an adult making a decision. If this goes through, then fast food is next, then eventually all we get is salads.

[Underverse]

In a sense they are, they are going after Soda, saying oh they target children and that's why children are fat. This is like the Tobacco thing, everyone knew smoking is bad, everyone knows soda is bad, only a dumbass think either is not dangerous.

No. They argue that Coke is targeting children through their advertising. They make no claims on whether or not this is making kids fat. They parallel this with strategies used by tobacco companies. Again, the suit isn't being filed for outcomes. It's being filed for corporate behavior.

The suit also claims that Coke targets kids with its advertising -- just like the cigarette companies -- as a way "to replenish the ranks of its customers, and it tries to recruit them young." Similar to tobacco's Joe Camel, which was said to be a subtle call to lure children into smoking, the suit points to Coke's animated polar bear advertising through a link to a website put up by the Center for Science in the Public Interest called The Real Bears, which warns of the dangers of soda consumption by playing off the polar bears.

[Dadwen]

Honestly all I see is wah we can't control ourselves why aren't you doing it for us, so we're suing.....

so next Pizza, pasta's etc etc as the guy said above we're only going to be allowed to have salads and that's it....

[Darsithis]

No. They argue that Coke is targeting children through their advertising. They make no claims on whether or not this is making kids fat. They parallel this with strategies used by tobacco companies. Again, the suit isn't being filed for outcomes. It's being filed for corporate behavior.

And, as I pointed out, "worse" (as in more sugar) things are marketed towards kids all the time. Such a frivolous lawsuit.

[Underverse]

READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE. Holy shit people.

This article and lawsuit has NOTHING TO DO with 'banning sodas for making people/children fat'.

This article and lawsuit is about the tactics used by soda companies, and parallels between these tactics and the tactics used by cigarette companies.

[Dadwen]

No. They argue that Coke is targeting children through their advertising. They make no claims on whether or not this is making kids fat. They parallel this with strategies used by tobacco companies. Again, the suit isn't being filed for outcomes. It's being filed for corporate behavior.

Maybe their parents should exercise some control and not let commercials and ad's rise their kids.

[Underverse]

And, as I pointed out, "worse" (as in more sugar) things are marketed towards kids all the time. Such a frivolous lawsuit.

And as I also already pointed out in response to your first post:

Triumphant trial lawyers likely would not just stop at soda, but would also attack other beverages they deemed unhealthy -- energy drinks, anyone? -- as well as processed food manufacturers, candy, ice cream, and snack makers.

Granted, this is an opinion written by the same person who gave us this:

Put down that soda! According to a lawsuit filed against Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO), the carbonated drink is just as dangerous to your health as a cigarette. Well, maybe not quite...

But if other companies are engaging in these kinds of tactics:

It charges that they colluded to confuse people about the science linking sugary drinks with obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. It says they chose to deflect attention from soda being the cause of such illnesses onto a lack of exercise as the likely cause, and maintained a fake news campaign that consumers could "balance" their intake of soda as part of an overall dietary regime of health.

Then cases should be brought to court.

[zenkai]

READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE. Holy shit people.

This article and lawsuit has NOTHING TO DO with 'banning sodas for making people/children fat'.

This article and lawsuit is about the tactics used by soda companies, and parallels between these tactics and the tactics used by cigarette companies.

I don't think it's you understanding the counter argument. We're saying it's personal/parental responsibility. I don't give a shit how many commercials any product does to target children if I don't think it's good for them I won't buy them because I am not a moron who gives in to a child's wants.

[Underverse]

Maybe their parents should exercise some control and not let commercials and ad's rise their kids.

Try to control your kid once it hits maybe 7 or 8, let me know how that works for you.

To expand on this, ads are unavoidable. They come at kids through the TV, internet, their phones, and out on the street. I say this even with adblockers on all possible devices. And children aren't mindless thralls of their parents. If they see something they like, their parents generally won't be able to reason with them as to why they shouldn't like it. Children don't have enough context to make intelligent decisions about these kinds of things, or understand why they shouldn't do something their body is telling them to do.

Secondly, children often have access to the means of acquiring the thing they desire. For example; middle-schoolers are generally given an allowance, and soda is incredibly easy to come by. Parents can't be omnipresent.

- - - Updated - - -

I don't think it's you understanding the counter argument. We're saying it's personal/parental responsibility. I don't give a shit how many commercials any product does to target children if I don't think it's good for them I won't buy them because I am not a moron who gives in to a child's wants.

- It's not jut about children. That's one small part of their argument.
- The weight of their argument is the obfuscation of scientific data, and the funding of studies that abrogate the link between sugar consumption and negative health outcomes.
- Your perception of what a child is is skewed. If your 10-year-old wants soda, they don't have to come to you to get it. You don't have absolute control over your children's actions. Children start to become relatively autonomous around 8, and their autonomy only increases from there.
- Even if you did somehow control your child's access to sodas, it's just about impossible to control their access to these kinds of advertisements; and when they are more free of you, the influence of these advertisements likely won't just vanish.

[Mad_Murdock]

Try to control your kid once it hits maybe 7 or 8, let me know how that works for you.

Secondly, children often have access to the means of acquiring the thing they desire. For example; middle-schoolers are generally given an allowance, and soda is incredibly easy to come by. Parents can't be omnipresent.

Been there, done that. We didn't allow the kids to have soda (or other sugary drinks) outside of family get togethers, until they were around 10-11, and then we allowed the kids to have a soda about every 2 weeks or so. mainly when I ordered Pizza. The wife focused early on having the kids drink water and eat veggies, we didn't keep sugar foods in the house that much, until the kids got to be 14ish. By that time, they preferred water over soda.

Tell yourself whatever you want, Parents have a great deal of control over this. It boils down to whether they have the guts to say No.