| ZNet Commentary
Coke : Hazardous Even Without Pesticides
September 25, 2003
By Vandana Shiva
A pesticide residue found in the entire range of soft drinks has once
again put focus on the Cola giants - Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola. However,
while government labs in Kerala and Rajasthan are giving the Cola
companies a clean bill of health because no pesticides were found, soft
drinks are hazardous even without pesticides. These hazards are intrinsic
to the production processes of Coke or Pepsi.
Firstly, the Cola companies mine water for their bottling plants, robbing
the poor of their very fundamental right to drinking water.
Secondly, the bottling plants are a source of toxic waste, which threatens
the environment and public health.
Finally, the soft drinks themselves are a toxic brew known to be hazardous
to health. For more than a year, tribal women in Plachimada in Palaghat
district have been sitting in protest against Coca-Cola because the
company has drained their aquifers dry. Wells and tanks have dried up with
the water table dropping from 10 ft. to 100 ft. As Virender Kumar of
Mathrubhumi has written, "People are bringing headloads of potable water
from afar, while truck loads of soft drinks are leaving the Coke Plant."
The plant draws more than 1 million litres a day, forcing women to walk
5-6 kms to bring headloads of potable water. 8.5 truckloads leave the
plant daily, loaded with soft drinks. Each litre of coke wastes 9 litres
of potable water (Virendra Kumar, Open letter to Chief Minister 10.8.03)
Agriculture yields have dropped to 1/10th in this rich Kerala ecosystem
that nature has endowed with abundant water, but Coke has mined and
robbed.
To add insult to injury, Coke distributed the toxic waste from its plant
as free fertiliser to the villagers. Tests done on the waste showed that
it contains extremely high levels of Cadmium and lead, which leads to
cancer, kidney and liver disorders.
The local panchayat has withdrawn the license, but the Kerala government
is protecting Coke, and in fact giving it Rs. 2 million as aid as part of
its industrial policy. Such subsidies have been provided by every
government where a Coke or Pepsi Plant exists. For local communities,
every bottling plant is a source of the double hazard of creating water
scarcity and dumping toxic waste.
Rural India is clearly a victim of the environmental and health costs of
the soft drinks industry. But middle class urban India is also a victim
because what Coke puts into the bottle is as toxic as what it leaves
behind. The only difference is that village women of Plachimada are aware
of the threat posed to their health and survival, but affluent urban India
is totally unaware of the harm soft drinks are causing them. The Rs. 6,247
crore spent annually by Indian consumers on soft drinks is spent on buying
health hazards, not "fun" as the ads say.
Soft drinks have zero nutrition value compared to our indigenous drinks
such as nimbu pani, lassi, panna, sattu. The soft drink giants have,
through their aggressive advertising, succeeded in making the youth of
India ashamed of our indigenous food culture in spite of its nutrition and
safety. They have monopolized the market for thirst, buying up indigenous
companies like Parle, and displacing indigenous cold drinks make at home
or in the cottage industry. But what Coke and Pepsi sell is a toxic brew
of colouring agents and chemicals with anti-nutritive values.
The nutrient-composition of soft drinks, per 12 ounce serving in
comparison to orange juice and low fat milk.
| Contents |
Coca Cola
|
Pepsi
|
OJ
|
Low-fat milk
|
| Calories
|
154
|
160
|
168
|
153 |
| Sugar, g
|
40
|
40
|
40
|
18 |
| Vit. A, IU
|
0
|
0
|
291
|
750 |
| Vit C, mg
|
0
|
0
|
146
|
3
|
| Folic acid, mg
|
0
|
0
|
164
|
18 |
| Calcium, mg
|
0
|
0
|
33
|
450 |
| Potassium, mg
|
0
|
0
|
711
|
352 |
| Magnesium, mg
|
0
|
0
|
36
|
51 |
| Phosphate, mg
|
54
|
55
|
60
|
353 |
Ref: Marion Nestle, Food Politics
The sugar in soft drinks is not natural sugar (sucrose), but high fructose
corn syrup. Plants for making corn syrup have started to be set up in
India, and if strict regulations are not put in place, the Indian diet
could go the way of the US diet, with high fructose corn syrup causing
insulin resistance. Unlike sucrose, fructose does not go through some of
the critical intermediary breakdown steps, but is shunted toward the
liver, where it mimics insulin's ability to cause the liver to release
fatty acids into the bloodstream. Studies have found that fructose diets
have 31% more triglycerides than sucrose diets. Fructose also lowers the
rate of fatty acid oxidation, P.A. Mayes, a University of London scientist
has concluded that,
Long-term absorption of fructose causes enzyme adaptations that increase
lipogenesis fat formation and VLDL (bad cholesterol) formation leading to
triglyceridemea (too many triglycerides in the blood) decreased glucose
tolerance, and hyper insulinemia (too much insulin in the blood).
Scientists at the University of California in Berkeley have also confirmed
that overuse of fructose was skewing the American diet towards metabolic
changes encouraging fat storage.
India cannot afford these high health costs of a fructose diet, which also
has other nutritional costs as side effects. When corn is used for high
fructose syrup, the poor are denied a food staple. Already 30% corn is
going for raw material for making industrial cattle feed and fructose, and
is diverted from human food. In addition, the displacement of healthier
sweeteners derived from sugar cane such as gur and khandsari robs farmers
of incomes and livelihoods. The impact of the Colas on the food chain and
economy is thus very large and does not stop with the bottle.
But what is within the bottle in any case is not fit for a healthy diet.
Consumption of soft drinks is well known to contribute to tooth decay.
Adolescents who consume soft drinks display a risk of bone fractures 3 to
4 fold higher than those who do not. Soft drinks are becoming the greatest
source of caffeine in children's diets, with each 12 ounce can of cola
containing about 45 milligrams of caffeine.
And there are other ingredients in the toxic brew, an anti-freeze compound
- ethylene glycol for lower freezing, phosphoric acid to give it a bite.
People are consuming 4 kg of chemicals a year per person on the basis of
20.6 million tonnes of chemicals in the form of artificial colours,
flavourings etc. (Prashant Bhushan "Soft drinks - A toxic - brew"). It is
therefore not just pesticides we should be concerned about, but the toxic
brew our children are being made addicted to by the Cola giants. And while
the corporations push toxics in the form of soft drinks they have
manipulated the government's Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA)
to deny Indian investors voting rights.
When Coca-Cola reentered India after being thrown out by George Fernandes
in 1977, it could only have 51% voting rights under a clause that says,
"Under any circumstances the voting rights of HCCHC (Coca Cola's Holding
Company) shall not exceed 51% in HCCBL i.e., the Indian shareholders
should get at least 49 per cent voting rights at all times." This clause
was deleted recently giving Coca-Cola imperial powers, to destroy the
health of Indians and rob Indians of their democratic rights
Even in political terms, Coke is a toxic brew.
|