The Very Official McDonalds (and other fast food outlets) Thread

[sqwidge1978]

Nobody is taking your choices away from you and it's not a matter of trust; Pepsi is still available at Pizza Hut, albeit at a higher price.

The levy wasn't intended to remove sugary drinks from the market, it was designed to make consumers stop and think about the choice. If you decide as a result of that to purchase the higher priced sugary version that's totally up to you.

but Lucozade have removed my choice, by removing the original recipe from the market and replacing it with an inferior tasting drink.

Same goes for Ribena they have changed it to a formulation that now gives you the runs.

[bilky asko]

Why, have they put laxatives in it?

[scottishtv]

Some sweeteners can have laxative effects. I know sugar-free Polos used to carry a warning on the back, telling people to avoid "excessive consumption".

Straying further off-topic, the reduced-sugar Rowntrees Randoms and Fruit Pastilles in the shops now, contain a thing called Promitor soluble fibre in place of some of the sugar, to bulk them up. The website for it boasts of "superior digestive tolerance so you don’t have to worry about consumer acceptance."

[bilky asko]

Some sweeteners can have laxative effects. I know sugar-free Polos used to carry a warning on the back, telling people to avoid "excessive consumption".

Straying further off-topic, the reduced-sugar Rowntrees Randoms and Fruit Pastilles in the shops now, contain a thing called Promitor soluble fibre in place of some of the sugar, to bulk them up. The website for it boasts of "superior digestive tolerance so you don’t have to worry about consumer acceptance."

I believe those sweeteners - xylitol, mannitol, sorbitol, lactitol, maltitol, etc. - are not present in Ribena. They are generally present in mints and chewing gum.

[scottishtv]

I believe those sweeteners - xylitol, mannitol, sorbitol, lactitol, maltitol, etc. - are not present in Ribena. They are generally present in mints and chewing gum.

Oh, I think Gregg Wallace should be sent back to the factory to find out.

[Critique]

In the midst of all the talk of the sugar tax recently I bothered to actually check how much sugar is in a bottle of Lucozade Sport and was fairly horrified when I saw how much! As a result I picked up a Lucozade Sport Lite to find that it tasted nowhere near as good. However, is it just me that finds Ribena light to taste just as good as normal Ribena? It has something mad like less that 30 calories in it per 500ml and less than 3g of sugar!

[Alexia]

Vimto Mix is just as good as full blooded Vimto now.

[james2001]

Some sweeteners can have laxative effects. I know sugar-free Polos used to carry a warning on the back, telling people to avoid "excessive consumption".

There's so many questionable side effects and long term health effects of these sweeteners that makes you wonder if they're really much better than sugar at all. But they're in nearly everything now, they're hailed as the magic solution (or they're cheaper for penny pinching buisnesses).

[james2001]

The levy wasn't intended to remove sugary drinks from the market, it was designed to make consumers stop and think about the choice.

It has removed drinks from the market though. Pretty much everything apart from Coca Cola and Pepsi has been reformulated to be full of sweeteners, and there are places which now only offer sugar free soft drinks. How is that not removal of choice? Especially for people who want to avoid artifical sweeteners for various reasons. The choice to pay more for the full sugared versions hasn't even been given to us for the majority of drinks.

I can't buy the lucozade I like, only a version that tastes like it's had fairy liquid poured into it, I can't add the flavours I enjoy to pepsi at the refill stations, when I went to the cafe in Asda the only options were diet drinks. If that isn't removal of choice, I don't know what is.

The levy might not have been intended to remove these drinks from the market, but with companies trying to avoid having to pay it, that's the effect it's had.

[bilky asko]

Some sweeteners can have laxative effects. I know sugar-free Polos used to carry a warning on the back, telling people to avoid "excessive consumption".

There's so many questionable side effects and long term health effects of these sweeteners that makes you wonder if they're really much better than sugar at all. But they're in nearly everything now, they're hailed as the magic solution (or they're cheaper for penny pinching buisnesses).

What evidence do you have to back up thag first statement? Do any of these sweeteners cause significant tooth decay and diabetes when consumed excessively? And what is the actual percentage of products they are in, seeing as sweeteners are notoriously bad for use in baking?

[Ebeneezer Scrooge]

I too have an issue when it comes to state sanctioned diet - removal of options doesn't count as education, so while the initial effect may be an improvement in health, these adults who "can't be trusted" will still opt for sugar en-masse as soon as the opportunity arises.

Take the supermarkets as an example - most have already increased their prices and removed offers on 500ml bottles of coca-cola. While that doesn't affect me massively as I would tend only to have that as a sugar hit following particularly heavy exertion, it has affected me by way of the supermarkets/manufacturers using it as a mask to hide the fact that they've increased the price across all options.

Meanwhile, while walking around after seeing my 2 for £2 option had disappeared entirely across coca-cola AND coke zero (It's since been reintroduced to Coke Zero as 2 for £2.20), I went along the non-refrigerated drinks aisle and found 1.75L of coca-cola for 30p more than a 500ml bottle.
And that was without the three for... offer being applied.

So would the sugar tax result in me buying less sugary drinks? With pricing as it currently is, no - I'd just end up buying in bulk to hide the cost increase!