Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by slifin 704 days ago
I know lots of people, loved ones included who are utterly addicted to sugar-free soft drinks they will not even touch the "full fat" versions.

There are no nutrients there and they appear more addictive, which is why I suspect the industry was so accommodating in moving away from sugar

5 comments

Diet Coke is notorious for having higher caffeine content than its brethren. Edit: I mean, that's why I love it
> and they appear more addictive

_Massive_ citation needed, tbh. Sugar is highly addictive.

(Also, I mean, even if aspartame _was_ very addictive, to some extent, well, so what? To be clear, soft drinks ~never contain the sugar alcohols that people are talking about above; the sheer volumes would have, well, undesirable digestive impact. They use aspartame, which is pretty well-understood at this point.)

We’re adding fat to soft drinks now?
Full fat is a Britishism for whole milk and it's used to refer to non-diet drinks too as a way of saying full sugar. Original coke is often called 'full fat coke'.
Real sugar soda tastes like shit by comparison. It's less sweet, and it's got a sour aftertaste as the flora in your mouth begin fermenting the sugar to acid. And you get cavities and weight gain as bonuses.
fat??
Fat as in fat models, thin controllers ;-)