On Wednesday, the Center for Environmental Health revealed that Pepsi’s caramel coloring still poses a risk to consumers due to a high levels of a carcinogenic known as 4-methylimidazole, or 4-Mel.
4-Mel can be formed after certain foods are cooked, so many foods may contain the carcinogen, even in trace amounts. So why is this shocking? The news of the finding comes not long after Coca-Cola and Pepsi agreed to reformulate their drinks in compliance with a new California law stipulating that certain drinks with high carcinogen levels come with a warning label.
Coke has removed the caramel coloring that contains 4-Mel from all their beverages, not just ones sold in California. However, while Pepsi is compliant with the law in California, drinks sold outside of California were found to contain levels of 4-Mel some four to eight times higher.
This is bull–okay, so Pepsi is being responsible and complying with a law in California, but the rest of the country can drink beverages containing a carcinogen that’s been linked to cancer? I’m not saying that Coca-Cola is a pure and wonderful company (I was involved with the Campaign to Stop Killer Coke in college; Coke’s corporate practices are unbelievably messed up) but you have to admit that they’re being smart and realizing that there is a reason California put that law into effect–to give consumers choices and allow them to protect their health. Why it hasn’t spread to the rest of the country, I don’t know.
Then again, are we to be surprised that a company that added an artificial sweetener that’s 200x sweeter than sugar to it’s diet formula would do the bare minimum when it comes to corporate responsibility, caring more about profits than the well being of their consumers?
What’s your take, LivLunatics? Do you think Coke is smearing their competition, or should the California law spread to the rest of the country?
Kathleen H. Furey 