pepsi throwback

[Shik]

For me, there is NOTHING like an ice cold can of Pepsi after work. I have maybe one can a day if that, and it's only 150 calories so...

 

Sure, no soda is good for you as far as what's in it, but I enjoy it and depriving myself of that feeling of that first slug of an ice cold can, the burn you get, that would be worse for me then the 150 calories and grams of sugar IMHO. I drink water all day long walking on a 7 mile mail route, so when I get home, it's a Pepsi FTW.

 

I like the throwback Pepsi and Dr. Pepper, but for some reason the TB Pepsi seems less fizzy? Maybe it's me

[TPLGT]

Widey enjoy the TB Dr. Pepper....im not a soda guy...

[Wang Lung]

The only time I drink soda, it has bourbon in it.

[Bolksey85]

Wait, there's a Dr. throwback? Need to try! And I tried the Dew throwback once and while I like sugar, that stuff was sugar overload, IMO.

[Brady]

I think Dr. Pepper is offered in Sugar variety only in some places in the south. I know of folks in Texas who talk about getting it. It isn't officially a "Throwback" variety, as the Throwback name is being used by Pepsi, and Dr. Pepper isn't officially affiliated with either Pepsi or Coke - just depends on the regional licensing agreements whether it's bottled/distributed by Coca-Cola or Pepsi affiliates. Then in some areas of the south, I believe Dr. Pepper has it's own bottling and possibly distribution networks.

[bluesuby]

DAMN!!!!

 

I need to try them....

 

I used to go to Mexico a LOT and down there (actually the entire Latin America) they have Cokes and Pepsis made with REAL SUGAR instead of the crap High Fructose Corn Syrup, and the taste is muuuuuch better...

 

Can't wait to try these!!!

 

 

Flavio Zanetti

Boston, MA

 

I've never been to Mexico, but you are so right about Coke in Latin America. Reminds me of the way Coke tasted 30 years ago. I hear you can sample the different Coke formulas at their museum in Atlanta.

[bakabakablah]

I've seen a resurgence of the "limited time" throwback Pepsi with new labeling. They still claim it's for a "limited time."

 

As far as the high fructose corn syrup, I gotta agree with Ridgeracer ... it's still glucose and fructose in pretty much the same proportions, but aren't chemically bonded. I'm not buying that it's the High Fructose Corn Syrup that's making people fat and causing diabetes. It's the 1.5-2 liters of soda they drink every day (800 - 1100 calories!) while sitting in their cubicle and snacking on junk food all day (chips, m&m's or whatever candy seems to be in every office), then going home and sitting on the couch after scarfing down too much food and not doing anything active. The average American needs less than 2000 calories a day, but consumes closer to 3000 (some estimates in the year 2000 put average consumption at 2700 calories a day).

 

But of course, it's easier to point to some minor change in the production of food than to put down the candy bar and pick up an apple. I can't wait to see all these fat f***s move away from HFCS only to find out they're still fat sedentary slobs.

 

 

All of what you're saying is true, but it's undeniable that HFCS is still pretty bad for your body since things made with sugar eventually causes your body to signal to your brain that it's had enough, as opposed to HFCS where that signal never reaches the brain (and thus, contributing to the problem of people overindulging in certain types of food).

Here's a video of an expert giving a lecture on the dangers of HFCS... [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM&playnext_from=TL&videos=tRHu2H-H8xA]YouTube- Sugar: The Bitter Truth[/ame]

 

Yes, it's 1hr 30min long and yes, it's a bit technical. For those who can't be bothered to watch (and I highly recommend that you do), essentially what the guy is saying is that HFCS is in everything and that it is as bad (possibly worse) for your body (mainly your liver) as ethanol is, due to the way that the liver processes both ethanol and HFCS.

[Shik]

Wait, there's a Dr. throwback? Need to try! And I tried the Dew throwback once and while I like sugar, that stuff was sugar overload, IMO.

 

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4047/4316949813_95e4961f96.jpg

 

Yes, Brady was right. "Heritage", not "Throwback" . Funny, I probably bought 5 cases of it in the last few months and never noticed it.

 

And FWIW, it's available in central PA.

[TrueWhiteBoy]

I remember hearing that the sugar versions of the drinks tend to pop up around Passover as well.

 

Also, Costco periodically sells "Mexican Coke" which is the Cocacola version of Pepsi Throwback.

[fzanetti]

Mexican Coke is actually bottled in Mexico with real sugar...

 

This recalls home when I was a kid and had to chip money from all friends and other dudes to buy a liter coke at the local grocery store...

 

 

 

Flavio Zanetti

Boston, MA

[berkshire40]

liter cola? just get a large farva!

i dont want a large farva, i want a damn liter of cola!

 

 

pepsi max FTW

[Wang Lung]

All of what you're saying is true, but it's undeniable that HFCS is still pretty bad for your body since things made with sugar eventually causes your body to signal to your brain that it's had enough, as opposed to HFCS where that signal never reaches the brain (and thus, contributing to the problem of people overindulging in certain types of food).

 

That would not apply to me. Not only do I have a brain, but I know how to use it.

[fishbone]

Since you have apparently uncovered the power of suggestion, I am all ears

[Brady]

it's undeniable that HFCS is still pretty bad for your body since things made with sugar eventually causes your body to signal to your brain that it's had enough, as opposed to HFCS where that signal never reaches the brain (and thus, contributing to the problem of people overindulging in certain types of food).

 

See, the problem with that is that it isn't at all scientifically shown to be the case. It's a hypothesis, but it has no real science to actually back it up.

[bakabakablah]

That would not apply to me. Not only do I have a brain, but I know how to use it.

 

So do most people... I hope

I'm just saying that based on what I've learned and read, the brain doesn't receive the signal of satiety so if you're just mindlessly munching on something with HFCS while watching a movie or while playing video games, most people will end up eating far more than one serving of whatever they're eating as opposed to an apple or something where you'll feel full (or get tired of the taste) after a certain amount.

 

See, the problem with that is that it isn't at all scientifically shown to be the case. It's a hypothesis, but it has no real science to actually back it up.

 

Have you seen the video I posted? I'm fairly certain as he's explaining the process of how fructose is broken down he has some references on the PowerPoint slide...

 

In any case, I still think that consuming HFCS in moderation (or any other non-natural food for that matter) is a good idea. After thousands of years of fine-tuning that allowed our bodies to make the most of natural foods, the crap that we consume today must be a shock to our systems. With that said, would I give up my Coke, or my Fruit Loops? Hell no. Nothing goes better with a juicy burger than a glass of Coke.

[Brady]

I didn't watch that video, but I've read a few of the studies suggesting that possibly Sugar is broken down differently than HFCS. The thing is that just because it's broken down differently, doesn't mean that there is actually a signal to your brain. That's the problem. People have hypothesized that because it's "different" that it must have a different effect. Either way, your body breaks down the sugar into Fructose and Glucose, and there isn't much scientific reason to believe that the process of it breaking down would send any signal to your brain that it's "had enough."

 

Sugar is NOT naturally occurring either. Not in the quantities that we add it to food. It has to be heavily processed and refined to be found in the forms we use to add it to soft drinks or foods.

[fishbone]

Just because there is no scientific study to underline a hypothesis, doesn't mean it is invalid. I base my opinion on my personal experience. I have lived more years in Europe than the United States. There is a difference between foods with sugar and HFCS along the lines of what has already mentioned here.

Sugar, as in the sweet, IS found naturally. HFCS, not so much. When was the last time you ate an apple with HFCS in it?

[fishbone]

Aaaaanyways ...

I looked around here but unfortunately the only Coke I see with real sugar is in the Ethnic isle and they want .99 a bottle

[gelfling68]

If you want "throwback" Dr. Pepper all you have to do is go here.

 

http://www.dublindrpepper.com/?gclid=CJ-fjaSouaECFQdS2godACtV-A

 

"What makes us unique? Besides being the oldest Dr Pepper bottler in the world, Dublin Dr Pepper also has the distinction of being bottled with Imperial Pure Cane Sugar - the original Dr Pepper formula."

 

Dublin Dr. Pepper is so good one wonders why the consumers let the other bottling plants change the formula.

[Brady]

Just because there is no scientific study to underline a hypothesis, doesn't mean it is invalid. I base my opinion on my personal experience. I have lived more years in Europe than the United States. There is a difference between foods with sugar and HFCS along the lines of what has already mentioned here.

Sugar, as in the sweet, IS found naturally. HFCS, not so much. When was the last time you ate an apple with HFCS in it?

 

When was the last time you ate an apple with refined table sugar? Sucrose is common table sugar, the kind of "natural" sugar that comes out of refineries. There is very little glucose found in an apple. However, there is more glucose in Raspberries, Strawberries or Pineapple. In fact, seemingly the sweeter the fruit, the higher the glucose content likely is. Because these fruits all produce different levels of fructose and glucose levels, you can't say they have "sugar" (refined table sugar, which is a bond of 1 unit Fructose and 1 unit Glucose to form the Sucrose molecule).

 

So again, considering that "sugar" (sucrose) isn't "natural" in the first place (not as provided as an additive to food or beverages) I don't see how you can say that our bodies are naturally inclined to say "enough is enough."

[bakabakablah]

After reading a few journal articles it seems Brady was correct in the sense that there isn't a consensus on the effects (if any) of HFCS. On your second point about how the body says it's had enough, I believe insulin is responsible for that but I'm not 100% sure.

 

In any case, I still need to try this throwback stuff before they stop selling it...

[fishbone]

Correct, insulin does it and apparently doesn't interact the same way with sucrose than compared with glucos.

Either way, we can all agree there is no consensus and the gov't called for more research. That's enough for me to try and minimize my intake as much as possible. I can give you anecdotal evidence which I had experienced first-hand such as crazy high trygliceride readings, how it affects my apetite as someone that didn't grow up with this stuff etc but it's just going to be an endless debate with nobody agreeing.

I am curious on what grounds this research for example has been dismissed by the pro-HFCS crowd. Because the test subjects were rats instead of humans? It's a fairly recent one

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

The rats in the Princeton study became obese by drinking high-fructose corn syrup, but not by drinking sucrose. The critical differences in appetite, metabolism and gene expression that underlie this phenomenon are yet to be discovered, but may relate to the fact that excess fructose is being metabolized to produce fat, while glucose is largely being processed for energy or stored as a carbohydrate, called glycogen, in the liver and muscles.

I had a period of time when I suddenly started drinking pop daily, just for no good reason. A few months into this I went for my routine bloodwork, my tryglicerides were in the mid-300s IIRC. Just a year later they were in the 100s with no dietary change other than not drinking pop. I know I am making it sound like a perfect scenario for this argument, but it's true. The doc, when he saw the 300s, told me to lay off the red meats. Needless to say I didn't pay attention to his advice.

[Brady]

Fishbone - again, did you ever drink a lot of soda made with "natural" refined sugar?

 

The difference is that it's very likely calorie density related issues and not how the body reacts to the source of the sugars. There definitely is not any study that indicates that the body produces insulin at different rates for Sucrose vs. HFCS.

 

Now, for arguments sake, please start drinking Pepsi Throwback, Mountain Dew Throwback, Heritage Dr. Pepper, and Mexican Coke (usually available at Costco) daily for the next year and please report back your triglyceride levels.

 

[fishbone]

I have lived more years in Europe than in the US. I've still got 4 years to break even All I ever had was the "throwback" version of Coke, Pepsi, etc. To me there is a difference that goes beyond taste. My wife who's only been here 4 years agrees. The difference in taste regarding pop was one thing that slapped me in the face. The other was milk. It has no taste, except for the red cap. There is still stuff that tastes like total crap to me, such as Twizzlers. Cake icing used here for some reason makes me gag if I have more than a few tablespoons. It's almost like you guys have become desensitised to sweet and you overdo a lot of things.

What about my quote regarding the differences in metabolism?

[Brady]

I'd have to go back and read the rat study again. But if the study itself wasn't flawed, the article about it was. The study was heavily criticized by neutral nutritional experts for doing a very poor job explaining how the study was conducted.

 

And as for the soda with Sugar and the soda with HFCS, my point is that you said you were drinking it daily. Did you ever drink "Sugar" soda daily?