zlacker

Meanwhile 2 billion Coca Colas are sold per day. That's over 75 million kgs of sugar/day - no one bats an eye.

Teen/kid addiction to sugar was and is a priority.

Social networks is a sugar for minds.

>>betaby+(OP)
You must have been a child when Michelle Obama said that children needed better food and half the country lost their collective minds. Hard to do anything when corporations control what most legislation is passed.

>>shimma+P
> You must have been a child when Michelle Obama said

My kids were born long before Obama took the office.

What's your point again? That president can't control the quality of the food in the country under their control?

>>shimma+P
I've always wondered if her initiative, which caused some big food companies to reduce fat and salt in their products, and change their frying media, is the reason for the rise of Sriracha in America.

My theory is that the food tasted less flavorful, so people compensated by adding their own.

I don't eat a lot of junk food, but for a long time after the Obama administration, when I did partake, often my immediate reaction was "Wow. These aren't as tasty as I remember."

/I'm looking at you, Cool Ranch Doritos.

>>betaby+(OP)
"No one bats an eye" is a weird take when the Federal Government, via the Department of Health and Human Services, has literally just declared war on added sugar. [1] Also, lots of people have already changed their diets [2] regarded added sugar.

Sugar has been vilified for longer and more vociferously than social media use by kids, but that may be changing now.

[1]: https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2026-01-07/trump-admin...

[2]: https://ajcn.nutrition.org/article/S0002-9165(23)02461-9/pdf

>>betaby+o2
The way I read it, he takes issue with your assertion that "nobody bats an eye" at sugar in Coke.

This is quite the opposite of everything I've ever seen in my entire life in America.

Or perhaps since you mention sugar, not corn syrup, and list quantities in kilograms not pounds or tons, he suspects you may not actually have first-hand experience with this.

>>antifr+83
Well the narrative has already been promulgated that they are "anti-science" so it's being ignored. Sugar is good. Hey Mom, send down more Pixie Stix!!

>>reaper+J3
> you may not actually have first-hand experience

Sigh ( in canadian )

>>reaper+G2
Can you point to any examples of big food companies actually making changes for Michelle Obama's campaign?

>>tokyob+c4
You must run in different circles than I, most people I know have reduced their added sugar consumption. My point was that there has been a swelling wave of anti-sugar sentiment over the last decades and it's reach the point were even RFK loudly said sugar is bad. That's the opposite of "no one bat's an eye". Of course people will ignore all sorts of advice for all sorts of reasons, but the sentiment (as shown by the decline of added sugar consumption) is there, and growing.

>>malfis+K4
Sisco, e.g. public school cafeterias. That's probably about it. The way in which school menus were actually changed was very misguided however.

>>antifr+e5
I recall a discussion here recently whereupon the list of items eligible for nutrition assistance (food stamps) in the USA were changed to exclude unhealthy foods, especially those with added sugar. Which BTW affects poorer communities disproportionately with long-term health problems like diabetes.

Elimination of processed sugar is a good thing.

Despite this, the discussion quickly pivoted to "how dare you keep poor children from enjoying birthday cake".

>>betaby+(OP)
> no one bats an eye.

Untrue

My six year old grand child made up a food related game for me to play with them that involved penalties for choosing food with sugar.

Somebody is getting to them, good

>>betaby+o2
Point is that people do in fact try to change what you're complaining about, your dismissive comments are just sad. Go out and organize rather than shouting into the void if this is what you care about.

>>betaby+J4
Thank you for proving my point. Unless Obama was also president of Canada. I may have missed that.

>>antifr+e5
The Coke Classic is still selling. Coke Zero has not replaced Classic. Both "no one bat's an eye" and your use of "most people" (even with the "I know" qualifier) are clearly extremes of both sides of the conversation being intentionally used. The fact that things like Diet, Zero, etc version of Coke and other soft drinks exist show people are paying attention to sugar. The fact that sugary products are still being purchased shows that not everyone has changed their habits.

Shouting extreme positions doesn't really move the conversation

>>malfis+K4
First two results from this new-fangled thing they call a "search engine:"

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2768807?re...

https://www.vox.com/2016/10/3/12866484/michelle-obama-childh...

>>reaper+G2
sriracha has a ton of sugar in it, ditto for things like ketchup.

in all likelihood it's just enshittification, as those big corps make more slop for the plebs to eat in the cheapest way possible

>>reaper+Mo
I appreciate you sharing those links, even if you had to get a jab in doing it :-)