McDonald's Ditches Soda In Happy Meal Menus

sloth3toes

I'm an adult, I chose to smoke. This whole article is about children. If tobacco was being sold to children then I'd definitely have a problem with it.

Just out of curiosity, at what age did you start smoking? I tend to believe the ( not necessarily substantiated ) views that tobacco companies do in fact, get their new customers as 'children....' that is, if the internet is to be believed... the average age for a 1st cigarette is somewhere around 13 - 15 years old.... which happens to be my personal experience, if I recall.

spookiefox

Well this will not work and will not last. As a parent we treat McDonalds and Happy meals as a treat or reward and part of the treat is having a soda. I'll give it a few weeks and people will be screaming or going somewhere else.

I did wonder this. How many parents/children are going to complain about not being able to order a soda with their Happy Meal? Quite a lot of people won't be happy with not being able to have a choice in my opinion.

As juice frequently has similar calories as soda this as guessed is just a PR exercise to appease the Soda is the work of the devil crowd.

The occasional Soda as part of a balanced diet is no problem

I used to think this too, I don't think there's anything wrong with having a bit of sugar in your diet but the other crap and chemicals that soda is full of does makes me wonder about how safe it is to consume. It only takes one search of 'chemicals in soda' on Google to bring up the word 'cancer' multiple times.

I think these ingredients should be banned until proven whether or not they're safe for human consumption.

Well, soda is full of chemicals, but only because everything that exists is made of chemicals. Water is a chemical, FFS. Can you be more specific as to which "crap and chemicals" in soda you think should be "banned" and why each one is harmful?

To help you out, here are the ingredients in Coca Cola:

Carbonated water
Sugar (sucrose or high-fructose corn syrup depending on country of origin)
Caffeine
Phosphoric acid
Caramel color
Natural flavor

Can you tell me which of these should be banned, and why?

Sure. Now... I'm not a scientist but I have read quite a bit and watched documentaries on these things.

So apparently:

1. Long term exposure to caramel colouring lead to an increase in lung cancer in mice
2. Aspartame in diet drinks have been linked to cancer and weight gain
3. Excessive phosphorus exposure (ie two or more cokes a day) is linked to an increased risk of kidney disease
4. High-fructose corn syrup linked to obesity

Sure, this is theoretical. Which is why I personally think it should be banned until proved it's safe for ingesting.

Tobacco was once considered safe until people started dying from it. People are currently dying from obesity related diseases. I'm not a clean eater by any means and sometimes I drink diet sodas too, but they do need to be looked into properly and should not be given to children in my opinion.

I can't find studies that say any of the things you've claimed. But you're not being consistent for one--you said sodas, and now switch to diet sodas--and diet sodas are sweetened with various different sweeteners, not just aspartame. The thing makes HFCS associated with obesity is he fructose, and the fructose content of apple juice is higher than most sodas--as is total sugar content. Shall we also ban apple juice until it's proven safe? And saying something shouldn't be given to children, or should be looked in to, is not the same thing as being banned, which is what you initially advocated. I think everything should be studied, but banning is another animal altogether.

For the record, I would not support banning tobacco either.

I didn't specify a preference to either so I'm not being inconsistent. Pretty sure McDonald's won't be advertising diet sodas as well as regular sodas. And like I said, it's my opinion. A quick Google search brings up plenty of health concerns around these drinks. When I said it shouldn't be given to children, that is my own opinion, as in I wouldn't give it to mine if I had them. What other people do is up to them.

I wouldn't necessarily ban sodas all together but I don't think they should be consumed due to these health concerns, which in my opinion, means banning them (or specifically, the potentially dangerous ingredients in them) until we do know these things which is what I stated originally. Children do buy these drinks after all. Tobacco is dangerous, hence it having an age limit to buy. I also wouldn't ban tobacco since I'm addicted to nicotine. Adults can make informed decisions, children can't.

That's my view anyway, if yours differs, fair enough.

But my replies are based on the fact that "should be banned" keeps getting repeated. And here again, you say soda should be banned. SO I ask you to say, once and for all, should soda be banned or should ingredients in soda be banned (and if so which ones and why)? And if so, why should your opinions be what decides what I am allowed to eat?!? EVERY SINGLE reply you have made has said you advocate banning soda or some ingredients in soda until we know if they are harmful, and now you say you do no not advocate banning tobacco even though you used it as an example of something harmful. Worse yet, your reason for not advocating banning tobacco is because you use tobacco. (I don't advocate banning it, but I do not use it. At all.) I don't advocate making other people's decisions for them.

You're not reading what I wrote properly. I've already stated that I meant the ingredients, for the reasons I have stated. I've also stated that they're my opinions and what other people choose to do is up to them. When did I state that my opinions should dictate what you should eat? I don't care what other people do. I simply think that these companies should take responsibility for their products. Coca Cola's original formula didn't contain these ingredients. Why do they have to now?

I don't feel the same about tobacco because it's not sold to children who don't know any better. And actually I don't smoke tobacco. I'm on an eCigarette. I used to be smoke tobacco but I don't blame the tobacco companies for that. I'm an adult, I chose to smoke. This whole article is about children. If tobacco was being sold to children then I'd definitely have a problem with it.

Like I've said multiple times. This is my opinion. If you don't like it, don't listen. Simple. I don't understand why you're unwilling to accept that people have different opinions.

I don't wish to get into a debate. I simply posted my thoughts on the matter. If you don't agree then just ignore it. Good day to you.

Which of the listed ingredients was not in Coca Cola's original formula? HFCS? Because every other ingredient has always been in Coke, and the HFCS problem is with how the liver process fructose. Plus one more, coca extract, which is now a scheduled drug. It's just plain false to say the original formula did not include these things, because it did. From the beginning, Coca Cola syrup has contained a sugar, caramel color, phosphoric acid, caffeine in the form of kola extract, and natural flavors (that they keep as a trade secret--which is a legal term --so no one can duplicate the taste), and originally coca leaf extract.

You're the one who's not getting it. You're saying certain ingredients in soda, and you don't specify which, should be banned until we know whether or not they are harmful. It's impossible to prove not harmful, which is why we ban things proven harmful. My objection is to your "opinion" that certain things should be banned before any hamfulness is proven. No one has "proved" apples are not harmful. They were once thought to be among the healthiest of fruits ("An apple a day keeps the doctor away.") We now know they are among the less healthy fruits--higher than average in fructose--along with melons and grapes. That doesn't prove they are harmful, but it does imply we might not know all there is to know about fruits. We should probably ban them all until we know, don't you think? If that sounds absurd, then you see why I find your "opinion" absurd. Nothing in Coca Cola has been proved to be harmful in and of itself. Including HFCS. It doesn't mean you shouldn't consume it in moderation, but banning things not proved harmless will not work. Nothing can be proved harmless; even "natural" things. It is ENTIRELY your suggestion that unnamed ingredients in soda should be BANNED that I am objecting to, because that's no the same thing as an opinion. It's saying that your opinion needs enforcement because i refuse to accept it.

You get that, right? BAN means make a rule or law preventing people from doing something? You say just ignore it, but you advocate making me not be ALLOWED to ignore it. I object to the opinion that if you think something might be harmful the rest of us should not be allowed to consume it until it is proved harmless.

whierd

You were talking about regular Coke, not Diet Coke, so why are you bringing up aspartame?

doorki

When did opinions become non-arguable points? Just because you have an opinion does not mean that people are not allowed to disagree with it and attempt to make their point.

Kimdbro

Well this will not work and will not last. As a parent we treat McDonalds and Happy meals as a treat or reward and part of the treat is having a soda. I'll give it a few weeks and people will be screaming or going somewhere else.

Ouch. This sounds like unintentional obesity training for kids. The danger is that kids come to associate food with approval and love and want more of it than is good for them. I like to reward the kids with something other than food.

Actually Laughed Out Loud!! Ha!

Kimdbro

Soda make you fat.
If u think im a joke, or not real, imagine Im euro style. Turns out its a fact idiot,
im croatia, now at north america. So my tastes, info, and thoughts have backing. Enjoy life my man.

Um ... what?

Its a fact idiot
Enjoy life my man

It would need to be coherent sentences in order to be fact, lady.

i am croatia. i do not speak america very

Almost 900 posts of not speaking "america very" with a solidly English name.

Easily my favorite of all the Trolls.... incoherent sentences, all the while calling people idiots and simultaneously saying to 'enjoy life' - also, apparently if one "is croatia", it means one's tastes, info and thoughts all are miraculously blessed with backing. Haha. These posts splattered throughout all the forums.... it's splendid, makes me laugh everytime!!

0somuchbetter0

Well this will not work and will not last. As a parent we treat McDonalds and Happy meals as a treat or reward and part of the treat is having a soda. I'll give it a few weeks and people will be screaming or going somewhere else.

Why not reward your kids with something healthy, not carbonated artificially flavored water? Mine get ice cream as a treat.

DrewMontoya

I haven't caught up with all the replies yet, so apologies if this has already been said. EDIT: Yup, mom2kpr brought it up on the second page.

As part of its commitment, McDonald's will only list water, milk and juice as beverage options for Happy Meals on menu boards, in-store and external advertising. It will also utilize Happy Meal and "other packaging innovations and designs to generate excitement for fruit, vegetable, low/reduced-fat dairy, or water options for kids."

So, this is the same thing as their breakfast value meals. They only list coffee as beverage options, but if you ask for a soda instead, they're more than happy to oblige without charging extra (unless you ask for a large, which is normal for their other value meals).

Nothing has changed other than advertising.

EDIT: To throw in what a good friend said, "Kids are so visual that they're hoping more will pick up non-soda choices." Yeah, I cannot see this as a bad thing.

dsjohndrow

Juice is just as bad. Oh, the things we think are healthy.

BinaryPulsar

As juice frequently has similar calories as soda this as guessed is just a PR exercise to appease the Soda is the work of the devil crowd.

The occasional Soda as part of a balanced diet is no problem

I don't think soda is the work of the devil. But, while it's true that soda is comparable to the calories and sugar in juice and milk, it's not comparable in terms of nutritional content. As a mother, I don't limit the calories my children eat (the more the better because they are skinny minny growing kids) and I'm not concerned about sugar (they are kids after all, and where else am I going to boost their calories). But, I do prefer the foods they eat or drinks they drink to hopefully have somewhat more nutritional value (even just a little is fine). This is just my opinion.

But, as I said before my kids are 6 and 9 and they would cry if I gave them soda. They just hate it. They don't like the bubbles or the extreme sugary taste. They say it burns their mouths and throats. They think it's an "adult" drink because my husband likes it. I guess soda is an acquired taste for some people. I don't hate it the way they do, but I'm not fond of it either, unless it has ice cream in it.

_Zardoz_

Well this will not work and will not last. As a parent we treat McDonalds and Happy meals as a treat or reward and part of the treat is having a soda. I'll give it a few weeks and people will be screaming or going somewhere else.

Why not reward your kids with something healthy, not carbonated artificially flavored water? Mine get ice cream as a treat.

since when has ice cream been considered healthy? Sugar and cream what a healthy mix

BinaryPulsar

Well this will not work and will not last. As a parent we treat McDonalds and Happy meals as a treat or reward and part of the treat is having a soda. I'll give it a few weeks and people will be screaming or going somewhere else.

Why not reward your kids with something healthy, not carbonated artificially flavored water? Mine get ice cream as a treat.

since when has ice cream been considered healthy? Sugar and cream what a healthy mix

Cream has fat in it, and that's good.