It starts with a question that has haunted my mind, and hopefully yours too: how is it that a product so familiar has such devastating consequences? Coca-Cola has been a staple in homes, schools, and offices for decades, its red logo synonymous with fun. However, emerging research shows that beneath the bubbles, a toxic nexus of public health threats and environmental degradation has existed all along.
1. The Sugar Burden and Chronic Disease
Recently, global assessments have confirmed that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) like Coca-Cola are anything but benign. Annually, in just the year 2020, there were 2.2 million new cases of Type 2 diabetes and 1.2 million new cases of cardiovascular disease that could be attributed to the consumption of SSBs. Scientists have already implicated not only obesity but also fatty liver disease, hypertension, and dyslipidemia to the consumption of SSBs. In countries like Mexico, Colombia, and South Africa, SSBs have already contributed to up to half the incidence of new cases of diabetes. This has already been vindicated by the many cohort studies indicating that excessive sugar from consuming sodas leads to inflammation, insulin resistance, and ectopic lipid accumulation.
2. The Addiction Factor: Caffeine and Sugar
Coca-Cola’s ingredients are a mixture of two substances that have addictive properties caffeine and sugar. While sugar activates the brain’s reward systems, similar to addictive substances, through controlled studies, and caffeine addiction is classified as such by the World Health Organization, SSB withdrawal symptoms such as headache, mood changes, decreased motivation, and cravings in heavy SSB users have been observed to occur after three days when use suddenly stopped in adolescents. This “use despite harm” pattern clearly identifies that Coca-Cola, like all addictive substances, has a difficult pattern to overcome once addiction sets in.
3. Deceptive Labels in the UK
In the UK, Coca-Cola profits from the food label paradox. A traffic light scheme, introduced to help individuals eat more healthily, gives Coca-Cola three green lights, despite the amount of sugar it contains. Dietitian Nichola Ludlam-Raine says, “Coke is justSkyrimasking the Roof for Sugar Content. In my opinion, it should not be permitted to be available for sale.” Some people think the nutritional system is flawed, as it promotes products with no sugar over products that are rich in nutrients, such as extra virgin olive oil.
4. Impact of Plastic Waste on the Environment
But aside from this concern on healthcare, the environmental impact of Coca-Cola is mind-boggling. It is the World’s biggest plastic polluter in terms of branding and produces nearly a quarter of all single-use PET bottles in the planet. By the year 2030, it is projected that its products will produce 602 million kilograms of plastic waste yearly that can fill the stomachs of 18 million whales. Micro-pollutants in single-use PET bottles are already being attributed to toxic risks within human communities in terms of cancer and infertility. While it admits that “reusable packaging is among the most effective ways to reduce waste,” it just removed the promise to make 25% of all packaging reusable by 2030 in favor of recycling. This is already greenwashing according to environmental groups.
5. Greenwashing & Recycling Myths
“Recycling” is being propped up as the answer, but less than 9% of all plastic has ever been recycled. This method creates microplastics that pollute air, earth, and water. Even recycling bottles contain plastic components and chemicals. Petrochemicals continue being made. Dianna Cohen of the Plastic Pollution Coalition points out that while Coca-Cola’s use of recycling tricks the public, another alternative, such as the use of glass bottles that can be used 50 times, has already been discovered.
6. Ways to Limit Soda Drinking
Experts suggest the following measures for limiting the consumption of Coca-Cola and other SSBs as suggested by health experts. They include not using soda as a reward drink and relying on it as a comfort drink, limiting soda to occasional consumption, and substituting it with healthier alternatives. Making use of sparkling water with no calories and additives is a healthy alternative. It has been found that substituting SSBs with sparkling water can decrease daily energy intake by as much as 200 kcal.
7. Policy Interventions and Public Awareness
Nations beset by high SSB disease burdens have started down the path of taxes, marketing restrictions, and front-of-pack labels. Soda taxes in Mexico, a levy in South Africa, and a sugar tax in the UK have led to some product reformulation, but marketing by the industry negates some of the progress. ‘Front-of-pack’ labels and public health media aimed at youth, who consume the most SSBs in each country, are essential because habits established in young people have a profound effect on cardiometabolic risk.
8. Connecting Health and Sustainability
As a health activist and eco-consumers, there is a two-fold argument against drinking Coca-Cola in which lessened consumption means better health for individual consumers, while health for the planet means disposing of single-use plastic materials in support of Coca-Cola packaging. Encouraging consumers to look for health drinks in returnable containers means promoting better health for everyone in society.
The evidence is overwhelming: The effects of Coca-Cola go well beyond what is in the bottle. Whether it is the metabolic effects of Coca-Cola’s sugar and caffeine or the iff effects that Coca-Cola has on the planet, Coca-Cola has a price that is collectively being paid.
