Bill, et al - minus the coffee, I had a similar experience with giving up soda and diet soda around six years ago (I think). Seltzer water has been a remarkable and welcome change, in that I realized that I was addicted. Quitting soda of both forms has made me very emphatic with alcoholics and other addicts. For a while at the start of my abstinence, every time I heard either a can opened or the familiar sound of soda being poured, smelled a familiar soda scent, or saw someone drinking one, I was hit with an irrational but strong urge for one. I found that drinking seltzer, with its similar “sounds”, along with the carbonation, has helped me satiate and almost eliminate the urge for soda. It’s still there, but I no longer get hit with the crazy need for one. To your article/essay, while I don’t think I’m super unhealthy, I wonder if my being about 30+ pounds heavier than I want/should be and my minimally high blood pressure are in part due to years and years of drinking soda and then diet soda with impunity? (Obviously the old correlation vs causation issue).
God’s blessings to you all. May you all know His grace and mercy today.
I’m pretty certain that for women, carbonation is not good for our long term bone health. The sugar and additives in soft drinks is a whole different matter. Just for my kidneys health, I limit my caffeine, and drink only water and occasionally some fresh fruit juice. Since I’m older, I also try to watch my weight because should I end up in a hospital, I do not want to be an overweight patient. Just something to think about. As a former health care worker, everything is more difficult for everyone if their patient is overweight and it’s not easy on the patient either.
It feels like we’ve reached the point, according to ongoing research, where the only thing safe to drink is water, and the only things safe to eat are blueberries and broccoli. I stopped drinking my beloved Diet Coke some months ago because the carbonation was giving me stomach aches. What I’m going to stop consuming going forward is the latest nutritional research.
Bill, I hope my comment did not sound critical of you. I didn’t mean it that way at all - just that the near-daily barrage of new eating related research is getting tiresome. I learned something new today and as I’ve written before, I always appreciate learning something new in your columns. So thank you!
Bill - outstanding column today. I share your experience of have diet soda around all the time and using it much like the energy drinks of today. Switching to water 20 years ago has been my addiction ever since. Of course, some “red, red wine…”🎶
Hi Bill, I have not drank soda for most of my life but not due to any research or health reason. I just don’t like sweet tasting drinks. My go to beverage is water or iced tea (the occasional beer or something a wee bit stronger too🍻
I certainly agree with the dangers and damage the consumption of too many sugary drinks may cause. However, there are articles related to FHS that mute the worry/fear over putting your lips to a can of soda.
Although Dr. Pase and his colleagues suggest that people should be cautious about regularly consuming either diet sodas or sugary beverages, it is premature to say their observations represent cause and effect.
Future studies are needed to test whether giving people artificial sweeteners causes adverse effects on the brain. -Stroke, a journal of the AHA
The Framingham equations used in current risk scoring methods over-predict the risk of mortality from coronary heart disease and all fatal and non-fatal coronary heart disease events by 47% and 57%, respectively, compared with observed events in a representative sample of British men.
-National Library of Medicine
In 2013, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the AHA adopted the pooled cohort equations, integrating data from the Framingham study cohort has rendered the Framingham risk score obsolete. -National Institute of Health
Since FHS scoring methods over-predict the risk of mortality from coronary heart disease by half, perhaps it might also widely overestimate the damage of soda to the brain. That said, drinking water with just a taste of lemon or lime …
Regarding soda: we quit soda years ago -- health reasons. We also got more intentional about reading food labels and avoiding anything with ingredients we can't pronounce. It's interesting that while eating healthy is more expensive, drinking healthy is way less expensive.
I suspect you don't look for anything positive, or look to see ONLY the worse. And I suspect you had trouble honestly discussing what Biden/that administration did wrong.
That’s politics—most people refuse to see any good in what they perceive as the "other side." Take this administration, for example. They're finally stepping up to regulate the crypto market, which is a solid move. But then Trump launches a meme coin, casting a long, goofy shadow over the effort. Not illegal, not immoral—just a bad look that hands the opposition easy ammunition. Same with tariffs—he could have gone the route of reciprocal tariffs with clear justifications. Instead, he went big, loud, and theatrical. The press eats it up, and anyone who's read his book knows he lives for that. Now, of course, someone will jump in claiming these "small goods" are actually signs of something sinister—but hey, that’s just how it goes.
Darrell, do you even read my comments? You always say I didn’t answer the question—or now, that I didn’t acknowledge something good. Regulating crypto. Reciprocal tariffs. Ring a bell? Which brings me right back to my point: Someone will always jump in and twist these “small goods” into something sinister. And here we are.
You conflate potentially good decisions with bad decisions, netting a bad decision. It’s like when someone breaks something (not broken) and then fixes it, all the while bragging about the “fix.”
I laid out clear examples of policy moves that had merit—regulating crypto and reciprocal tariffs. Whether their execution was flawed is a separate discussion, but that doesn’t erase the intent or potential benefit. Your analogy assumes these policies only "fixed" problems Trump himself created, which isn’t accurate—crypto regulation was overdue long before he entered politics, and tariffs have been a global economic tool for decades. You may disagree with their impact, but dismissing them outright ignores the complexity of policy-making. Also, sinister was indeed my word—because, as expected, any acknowledgment of nuance gets spun into a negative.
You and I BOTH apparently have identical problems: we cannot see what we don’t want to see. Further commenting always devolves into trying to convince each other of our positions, an obvious waste of time.
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions.
Not sure the tariffs are reciprocal. Seems to me he instigated them for his own purpose. In the end, the American people will end up paying more for the same product, and not a lot of manufacturing will show up in the country. It's just bad government.
Wrt Ruth Marcus resignation from Washington Post - I read the linked report in The Independent and was disappointed that it did not include publication of the full text of the article which was rejected by WAPO. In the spirit of the pentagon papers I believe the best way to handle this is for every paper to publish it.
My grandmother drank soda occasionally, she was not overweight, she walked most days and ate a pretty healthy diet. And yet, she developed Alzheimer's. Her diet did regularly feature red meat, so perhaps that might have played a role. For every negative thing attributed to soda, I believe there is a counterargument to be made. Personally, I used to down a double Big Gulp before 10am every day until I got pregnant and decided to be cautious about the chemicals and the baby's health, so I decided to stop. Now, soda is an occasional treat for me. Who knows if Alzheimer’s or brain shrinkage can be avoided remains a mystery, but why take the risk if you don’t have to?!
Did the diet soda studies distinguish between types of sweeteners, e.g., stevia, saccharine, etc., or between genders and ages and sociological factors? Or between types of drinks, like cola, iced tea, lemon-lime, flavored sodas and so on?
Bill, et al - minus the coffee, I had a similar experience with giving up soda and diet soda around six years ago (I think). Seltzer water has been a remarkable and welcome change, in that I realized that I was addicted. Quitting soda of both forms has made me very emphatic with alcoholics and other addicts. For a while at the start of my abstinence, every time I heard either a can opened or the familiar sound of soda being poured, smelled a familiar soda scent, or saw someone drinking one, I was hit with an irrational but strong urge for one. I found that drinking seltzer, with its similar “sounds”, along with the carbonation, has helped me satiate and almost eliminate the urge for soda. It’s still there, but I no longer get hit with the crazy need for one. To your article/essay, while I don’t think I’m super unhealthy, I wonder if my being about 30+ pounds heavier than I want/should be and my minimally high blood pressure are in part due to years and years of drinking soda and then diet soda with impunity? (Obviously the old correlation vs causation issue).
God’s blessings to you all. May you all know His grace and mercy today.
Never a huge soda drinker, but I stopped drinking totally because of a study I read years ago that carbonation is bad for the brain.
I’m pretty certain that for women, carbonation is not good for our long term bone health. The sugar and additives in soft drinks is a whole different matter. Just for my kidneys health, I limit my caffeine, and drink only water and occasionally some fresh fruit juice. Since I’m older, I also try to watch my weight because should I end up in a hospital, I do not want to be an overweight patient. Just something to think about. As a former health care worker, everything is more difficult for everyone if their patient is overweight and it’s not easy on the patient either.
It feels like we’ve reached the point, according to ongoing research, where the only thing safe to drink is water, and the only things safe to eat are blueberries and broccoli. I stopped drinking my beloved Diet Coke some months ago because the carbonation was giving me stomach aches. What I’m going to stop consuming going forward is the latest nutritional research.
Bill, I hope my comment did not sound critical of you. I didn’t mean it that way at all - just that the near-daily barrage of new eating related research is getting tiresome. I learned something new today and as I’ve written before, I always appreciate learning something new in your columns. So thank you!
Bill - outstanding column today. I share your experience of have diet soda around all the time and using it much like the energy drinks of today. Switching to water 20 years ago has been my addiction ever since. Of course, some “red, red wine…”🎶
No soda. I do love kombucha.
Hi Bill, I have not drank soda for most of my life but not due to any research or health reason. I just don’t like sweet tasting drinks. My go to beverage is water or iced tea (the occasional beer or something a wee bit stronger too🍻
Stopped drinking soda 30+ years ago (I'm in my 60's). Water, coffee, tea, occasional wine and spirits.
I certainly agree with the dangers and damage the consumption of too many sugary drinks may cause. However, there are articles related to FHS that mute the worry/fear over putting your lips to a can of soda.
Although Dr. Pase and his colleagues suggest that people should be cautious about regularly consuming either diet sodas or sugary beverages, it is premature to say their observations represent cause and effect.
Future studies are needed to test whether giving people artificial sweeteners causes adverse effects on the brain. -Stroke, a journal of the AHA
The Framingham equations used in current risk scoring methods over-predict the risk of mortality from coronary heart disease and all fatal and non-fatal coronary heart disease events by 47% and 57%, respectively, compared with observed events in a representative sample of British men.
-National Library of Medicine
In 2013, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the AHA adopted the pooled cohort equations, integrating data from the Framingham study cohort has rendered the Framingham risk score obsolete. -National Institute of Health
Since FHS scoring methods over-predict the risk of mortality from coronary heart disease by half, perhaps it might also widely overestimate the damage of soda to the brain. That said, drinking water with just a taste of lemon or lime …
Regarding soda: we quit soda years ago -- health reasons. We also got more intentional about reading food labels and avoiding anything with ingredients we can't pronounce. It's interesting that while eating healthy is more expensive, drinking healthy is way less expensive.
I quit drinking sodas many years ago, drinking water instead. And coffee. And some red wine.
I wonder if people can agree w/ some of Trump's decisions while disagreeing w/ others, & still get blasted???
When I see one I will let you know…
I suspect you don't look for anything positive, or look to see ONLY the worse. And I suspect you had trouble honestly discussing what Biden/that administration did wrong.
That’s politics—most people refuse to see any good in what they perceive as the "other side." Take this administration, for example. They're finally stepping up to regulate the crypto market, which is a solid move. But then Trump launches a meme coin, casting a long, goofy shadow over the effort. Not illegal, not immoral—just a bad look that hands the opposition easy ammunition. Same with tariffs—he could have gone the route of reciprocal tariffs with clear justifications. Instead, he went big, loud, and theatrical. The press eats it up, and anyone who's read his book knows he lives for that. Now, of course, someone will jump in claiming these "small goods" are actually signs of something sinister—but hey, that’s just how it goes.
What do YOU see as good decisions by trump?
Darrell, do you even read my comments? You always say I didn’t answer the question—or now, that I didn’t acknowledge something good. Regulating crypto. Reciprocal tariffs. Ring a bell? Which brings me right back to my point: Someone will always jump in and twist these “small goods” into something sinister. And here we are.
You conflate potentially good decisions with bad decisions, netting a bad decision. It’s like when someone breaks something (not broken) and then fixes it, all the while bragging about the “fix.”
Sinister is your word.
I laid out clear examples of policy moves that had merit—regulating crypto and reciprocal tariffs. Whether their execution was flawed is a separate discussion, but that doesn’t erase the intent or potential benefit. Your analogy assumes these policies only "fixed" problems Trump himself created, which isn’t accurate—crypto regulation was overdue long before he entered politics, and tariffs have been a global economic tool for decades. You may disagree with their impact, but dismissing them outright ignores the complexity of policy-making. Also, sinister was indeed my word—because, as expected, any acknowledgment of nuance gets spun into a negative.
You and I BOTH apparently have identical problems: we cannot see what we don’t want to see. Further commenting always devolves into trying to convince each other of our positions, an obvious waste of time.
The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions.
- Plato
Not sure the tariffs are reciprocal. Seems to me he instigated them for his own purpose. In the end, the American people will end up paying more for the same product, and not a lot of manufacturing will show up in the country. It's just bad government.
I suspect you don’t know what I think. And I’ve lived too long to not care what you think about what I think.
Ha - I’m old enough to have learned to read between the lines… & I can read you very well 👍
For all you know I’m a kid in my parent’s basement or someone that gets a kick out of pushing buttons.
BTW — before you edit,, you said “too long to not care what you think” meaning you DO care what I think
Yeah and I quickly fixed that typo.
Wrt Ruth Marcus resignation from Washington Post - I read the linked report in The Independent and was disappointed that it did not include publication of the full text of the article which was rejected by WAPO. In the spirit of the pentagon papers I believe the best way to handle this is for every paper to publish it.
My grandmother drank soda occasionally, she was not overweight, she walked most days and ate a pretty healthy diet. And yet, she developed Alzheimer's. Her diet did regularly feature red meat, so perhaps that might have played a role. For every negative thing attributed to soda, I believe there is a counterargument to be made. Personally, I used to down a double Big Gulp before 10am every day until I got pregnant and decided to be cautious about the chemicals and the baby's health, so I decided to stop. Now, soda is an occasional treat for me. Who knows if Alzheimer’s or brain shrinkage can be avoided remains a mystery, but why take the risk if you don’t have to?!
Well now you can put the election results into perspective: Americans thought impaired by excessive soda consumption!
I have to say a “hahaha” & I will add, not only the results but what led to the results, on both sides of the aisle 👍
Did the diet soda studies distinguish between types of sweeteners, e.g., stevia, saccharine, etc., or between genders and ages and sociological factors? Or between types of drinks, like cola, iced tea, lemon-lime, flavored sodas and so on?