Novi recepti

Pedijatri sada traže porez na sodu

Pedijatri sada traže porez na sodu

Američka pedijatrijska akademija poziva roditelje da ograniče konzumaciju slatkih napitaka za svoju djecu.

Pedijatri su godinama upozoravali roditelje na negativne posljedice viška dodanog šećera u prehrani njihove djece, ali Američka pedijatrijska akademija i Američko udruženje za srce sada poduzimaju drastičnije mjere kako bi obeshrabrili konzumaciju slatkih napitaka. Konzumacija slatkih napitaka povezana je s povećanim rizikom od pretilosti, dijabetesa, pa čak i rane smrti, zbog čega je zabrinjavajuća i za zdravstvene radnike i za roditelje.

Budite u toku sa tim šta zdravo znači sada.

Prijavite se na naš dnevni bilten za više sjajnih članaka i ukusnih, zdravih recepata.

Među ostalim predloženim strategijama bile su provedba saveznih marketinških propisa za slatka pića za djecu i tinejdžere, bolji pristup vjerodostojnim nutritivnim podacima o jelovnicima restorana, oznakama proizvoda i oglasima te bolnička politika koja ograničava ili obeshrabruje konzumaciju pića zaslađenih šećerom. Još jedan prioritet obje organizacije je rad sa saveznim programima pomoći, kao što su WIC i programi školskog doručka i ručka, kako bi se poboljšalo obrazovanje o ishrani i omogućio veći pristup zdravoj hrani i piću. U saopćenju se navodi da su djeca koja su društveno -ekonomski ugrožena često sklonija konzumaciji ovih pića i imaju veći rizik od pretilosti u djetinjstvu i adolescenciji.

Želite li saznati više o utjecaju dodanog šećera na zdravlje?

"Znamo da djeca svugdje konzumiraju prevelike količine šećera, uglavnom iz ovih slatkih napitaka", rekla je Natalie Muth, vodeća autorica izjave i glasnogovornica AAP -a. “Osim toga, mi u pedijatriji počinjemo uviđati zdravstvena stanja koja nikada niste imali kod djece, poput visokog kolesterola i dijabetesa tipa 2. Hitno je potrebno uvesti promjene, a sada postoji više dokaza i podrške kako bi se te stvari mogle preporučiti u izjavi. ”

Dok Američke dijetetske smjernice za razdoblje 2015-2020 savjetuju da ne unosite više od 10 posto dnevnih kalorija iz dodanog šećera, djeca u SAD-u konzumiraju gotovo dvostruko veću količinu-pri čemu polovica te potrošnje dolazi iz pića, navodi se u saopćenju. Muth je rekao da samo jedna soda od 20 unci sadrži tri puta dnevno ograničenje za dodatnu potrošnju šećera.

Muth je rekao da se pisanjem ove izjave ne radi samo o rješavanju nužnosti ovog problema, već o pronalaženju najefikasnijih rješenja za poticanje stvarnih promjena u našim zajednicama. Rekla je da su gradovi s porezom na sodu zabilježili povećanje unosa vode, a novac prikupljen od poreza na sodu uložen je u zajednice koje najviše pate od zdravstvenih posljedica prekomjerne potrošnje dodanog šećera. Muth je primijetio da je stavljanje dolara od poreza na sodu na pravo mjesto i pružanje boljeg obrazovanja ljudima na svim društveno -ekonomskim nivoima od ključne važnosti.

Obje organizacije kažu da prekomjerna konzumacija dodanog šećera - posebno iz pića sa šećerom - stavlja djecu u rani rizik od karijesa, bolesti srca, bolesti masne jetre, među ostalim kroničnim problemima, a ti se rizici mogu preokrenuti jednostavnim smanjenjem potrošnje. Također napominju da dodani šećeri pružaju malu ili nikakvu nutritivnu vrijednost i ne potiču sitost, što narušava prirodne znakove gladi našeg tijela i može uzrokovati da unosimo više kalorija nego što nam je potrebno.

"Roditelji moraju znati da je samo modeliranje zdravog ponašanja toliko utjecajno", rekla je Muth. “Ne shvaćamo uvijek da nas djeca prate i gledaju šta radimo. Ponekad se ne radi o tome da uopće moramo bilo što reći - uglavnom se ponašamo. "

Muth također potiče nuđenje vode ili mlijeka kao glavnog pića za djecu i suzdržavanje od redovnog držanja zašećerenih pića u kući. Muth je rekla da izlaganje djece vodi u ranoj dobi i da to postane standardni napitak u vašem domaćinstvu pomaže djeci da je vole, pa čak i da je preferiraju s godinama.

Ako vam je teško smanjiti potrošnju slatkih napitaka u svom domaćinstvu, imajte na umu da je upornost ključna. Muth je rekla da je često potrebno 15-20 puta probati zdravu hranu ili piće da bi se djeci to svidjelo, ali na kraju će se ipak pojaviti. Razgovor s administracijom u školama vaše djece ili kontaktiranje lokalne uprave o ovom pitanju pomoći će u poticanju promjena i smanjenju mogućnosti vaše djece da kupuju ili da im se nude zašećerena pića i izvan kuće.


Koja je razlika između sode bikarbone i praška za pecivo?

Ako ste raspoloženi za pečenje, recept koji zgrabite gotovo će zasigurno zahtijevati prašak za pecivo ili sodu bikarbonu. To je zato što su oba sastojka kvasac koji vaše omiljene pekare čini laganim, pahuljastim i vlažnim. No, iako su prašak za pecivo i soda bikarbona slični, definitivno nisu isti.

Soda bikarbona je napravljena od jednog sastojka - natrijum bikarbonata. Natrijev bikarbonat je baza (alkalna) koja se aktivira u dodiru s kiselinom, poput mlaćenice, jogurta, smeđeg šećera ili octa (obično je kiselina dio vašeg recepta). Kada se sode bikarbone aktivira, odmah oslobađa mjehuriće ugljičnog dioksida koji pomažu pecivu da se podigne i postane lagano i pahuljasto.

S druge strane, prašak za pecivo je kombinacija sode bikarbone (natrijum bikarbonata) i dvije kiseline, često monokalcijum fosfata i natrijum aluminijum sulfata. Ova dva dodatna sastojka produžavaju proces kvasanja. Monokalcijev fosfat najprije reagira na natrij bikarbonat, kada se prašak za pecivo umiješa u mokro tijesto ili tijesto, a zatim natrij -aluminij -sulfat reagira na natrij -bikarbonat kad je i vlažan i vruć (tj. Kad vaša peciva idu u pećnicu) .

Ovaj dvostupanjski postupak aktivacije-koji prašku za pecivo daje oznaku "dvostrukog djelovanja"-znači da možete odgoditi pečenje tijesta ili tijesta do 20 minuta bez utjecaja na njegovu moć kvašenja. Recepti koji koriste sodu bikarbonu, s druge strane, zahtijevaju trenutno pečenje za najbolje rezultate, jer soda bikarbona reagira na kiselinu čim se dvije pomiješaju.

Bez brige ako imate samo sodu bikarbonu pri ruci i treba vam prašak za pecivo. Soda bikarbonu možete zamijeniti praškom za pecivo s dvije mjere opreza. Prvo, potrebno vam je dovoljno kiselosti u smjesi da biste aktivirali sodu bikarbonu. Dobro pravilo je da vam je za aktivaciju potrebna 1 šalica mlaćenice ili 1 žličica soka od limuna po 1/2 žličice sode bikarbone. Drugo, morate izračunati odgovarajuću količinu sode bikarbone koju ćete koristiti. Soda bikarbona je četiri puta jača od praška za pecivo, pa se recept koji zahtijeva 1 žličicu praška za pecivo prevodi u 1/4 žličice sode bikarbone.

Ako slučajno imate kremu od tartara kod kuće, možete sami napraviti prašak za pecivo kombinirajući ga sa sodom bikarbonom. 1/4 kašičice sode bikarbone i 5/8 kašičice krema od tartara biće jednako 1 kašičici praška za pecivo.

Iako je relativno lako zamijeniti sodu bikarbonu praškom za pecivo, suprotno nije istina. Ako recept zahtijeva sodu bikarbonu, a sve što imate je prašak za pecivo, najbolje je da ne nastavite jer je prašak za pecivo kombinacija nekoliko sastojaka, pa njegovo dodavanje može utjecati na teksturu ili okus vašeg pečenog proizvoda. Soda bikarbona je i jača od praška za pecivo pa će vam trebati otprilike tri ili četiri žlice praška za pecivo (i smanjenje soli i drugih kiselih sastojaka u tijestu) kako biste približili zamjenu.

Još jedno upozorenje pri upotrebi sode bikarbone ili praška za pecivo: Pažljivo izmjerite. Previše sode bikarbone može uzrokovati pad vaših pekarskih proizvoda, dok previše praška za pecivo može dati gorak okus vašim dobrima. I premalo bilo kojeg od ovih kvasaca može dovesti do teške robe bez dovoljnog porasta.

Prašak za pecivo je prvi put predstavljen u Engleskoj krajem 1840 -ih, kombinacija kreme od tartara i sode bikarbone. Ali krema od tartara bila je skupa, pa su je Amerikanci morali uvoziti iz Evrope. Tako je 1856. godine američki hemičar stvorio moderan prašak za pecivo, koji zamjenjuje monokalcijum fosfat kremom od kamenca. Krajem 19. stoljeća američka industrija praška za pecivo vrijedila je milijune.


Višak šećera ɺ opasnost po zdravlje ': MD

Dr Tracey Bridger je otvorena prema ovome.

& quot; Definitivno smatram da je prekomjerna konzumacija šećera opasna po zdravlje, a za to postoje veliki dokazi#, rekla je za CBC 's Jutarnja emisija St. John 's u petak.

Pedijatrijski endokrinolog iz St. John 's, Bridger ima pacijente sa ozbiljnim problemima vezanim za šećer koji još nisu u školi. (Razmislite o tome.)

Upozorenja stručnjaka uvažena su u različitim jurisdikcijama, ali postoje kontradiktorni dokazi o tome rade li.

Ministrica finansija Siobhan Coady rekla je da je napravljen potez da se "Newfoundland i Labrador postave kao lideri u Kanadi i da će se izbjeći budući zahtjevi u pogledu zdravstvenog sistema."

Ipak, važno je napomenuti da je N.L. uvodi ovu mjeru za vrijeme fiskalne krize, kada se vjerovatno razmatra svaki način povećanja prihoda. Pokrajina se suočava s rastućim dugom i međugodišnjim deficitom koje pokušava staviti pod kontrolu.

Također, ne postoji (oprostite na igri riječi) šećer koji prekriva činjenicu da je novi porez na slatka pića regresivan. Odnosno, za razliku od poreza na dohodak gdje se veći prihodi plaćaju više, porez na potrošnju inherentno jede veći dio gotovine u domaćinstvima s nižim prihodima.

Josh Smee, izvršni direktor Food First NL, zabrinut je zbog tog utjecaja.

& quotPrvo rumenilo, uvijek postoji zabrinutost oko pravičnosti ove vrste poreza jer oni nisu samo regresivni u smislu da oni jače pogađaju domaćinstva s niskim prihodima, rekao je Smee u intervjuu ranije ove sedmice.

& quotOni 're su zapravo ponekad dvostruko regresivni jer pića zaslađena šećerom čine veći dio. Potrošnja po glavi stanovnika često može biti veća u domaćinstvima s niskim prihodima jer je to ponekad jedina dostupna poslastica ili slatko što ljudi mogu priuštiti. & Quot

Ako će biti poreza na šećer, i Smee i Bridger žele da ne postoji izolirano. Odnosno, oboje žele konkretnu akciju za rješavanje javnog zdravlja, koristeći sam novac koji će biti prikupljen.

Bridger je napomenuo da su pedijatri i drugi u redu s porezom, "uz odredbu da novac ide za proširenje zdravstvenih programa, subvencioniranje zdravijeg pića [i] izbora hrane, osiguravanje čiste i sigurne vode za piće, takve stvari."

Smee želi vidjeti šta još vlada ima na umu.

"Gdje su uvedeni ovi porezi, neke od najboljih praksi koje vidite širom svijeta je da se prihod koji ostvare reinvestira radi poboljšanja pristupa zdravoj hrani", rekao je. & quotNe znamo još ' tačno kako će to funkcionisati ovdje. & quot


PRETPLATITE SE ODMAH Daily News

KANSAS CITY, Kan. — Američka pedijatrijska akademija poziva zakonodavce da uvedu veći porez na slatka pića kako bi pomogli u suzbijanju epidemije pretilosti kod djece.

“Pazite šta vaša djeca jedu. Vi ste zaduženi za to ", rekao je dr Steve Lauer, vanredni predsjedavajući pedijatrije na Zdravstvenom sistemu Univerziteta u Kanzasu.

Ono što vaša djeca sada jedu utjecat će na njih kasnije, a Američka pedijatrijska akademija donosi politiku koja smanjuje količinu šećera koji uđe u djecu.

"Ideja koja stoji iza toga je da je šećer jedan od vodećih uzroka epidemije pretilosti u ovoj zemlji, te ga se treba nekako riješiti", rekao je Lauer.

Izvještaj AAP -a kaže da djeca konzumiraju više od 30 litara slatkih pića godišnje. To je dovoljno za punjenje kade za kupanje, a čak ni ne broji šećer iz hrane.

Stoga organizacija vjeruje da je način rješavanja epidemije pretilosti u djetinjstvu taksacija visokog poreza na slatka pića.

“Ideja je da to učinite skupljim i da ljudima stavite malo više kože u igru ​​”, rekao je Lauer. "Razmišljaju o tome šta kupuju za svoju djecu da jedu i piju. ”

Jedan od razloga zašto AAP cilja na slatka pića i sodu je to što se u jednoj boci sode od 16 unci nalazi skoro 300 kalorija koje se brzo troše.

"Ono što je nekad bila poslastica sada je uobičajena stvar koju djeca piju", rekao je Lauer.

“Ne želite ’željeti da je to glupo, ali možda moramo učiniti nešto kako bismo pomogli našoj djeci da se ne bore, ” Anna Ingolsby je rekla.

Mama troje djece iz metroa rekla je da ne kupuje slatka pića za njih jer je jedno od njene djece prekomjerne težine.

“Moj sin pije 2 posto mlijeka ”, rekla je Tiesha Wright, majka jednogodišnjeg djeteta. "Ne smije popiti pop ili sok ili ništa slično. ”

Upravo to Lauer predlaže roditeljima svojih pacijenata.

“Piće s kalorijama koje bi njihovo dijete trebalo imati je mlijeko ili neki izvor kalcija, a sve ostalo što imaju zaista bi trebalo biti bez kalorija ”, rekao je. “Jedna od zaista sjajnih stvari za to je voda. ”

U gradovima koji su povećali poreze na slatka pića taj dodatni novac ide za programe javnog zdravstva i prehrane.

Još jedna stvar za koju AAP vjeruje da će pomoći u epidemiji pretilosti u dječjoj dobi je kontrola marketinga slatkih pića za djecu i#8212 svih onih primamljivih reklama koje tjeraju djecu da više žele loše stvari.


Dve vrhunske medicinske grupe pozivaju na porez na sodu i oglašavanje ograničenja za pića sa šećerom

Dvije vodeće medicinske grupe u zemlji u ponedjeljak su uputile poziv na oružje protiv industrije sode, pozivajući zakonodavce i kreatore politike da prihvate poreze, oznake upozorenja i ograničenja oglašavanja kako bi odvratili mlade ljude od konzumiranja slatkih napitaka koji su sve više povezani s nacionalnom krizom gojaznost i hronične bolesti.

Opisujući zaslađena pića kao "ozbiljnu prijetnju zdravlju djece i adolescenata", Američka akademija za pedijatriju i Američko udruženje za srce izdale su niz smjelih preporuka politike za koje kažu da su neophodne za zaustavljanje epidemije dijabetesa tipa 2, raka, kardiovaskularnih bolesti i druge bolesti povezane sa ishranom odgovorne za desetine hiljada preuranjenih smrti i milijarde dolara godišnjih zdravstvenih troškova.

Organizacije kažu da su takve mjere potrebne ako se Sjedinjene Države budu pridržavale saveznih prehrambenih smjernica koje preporučuju da dodani šećeri čine manje od 10 posto ukupne kalorije koju konzumiraju djeca i adolescenti. Prema studijama, ta brojka sada iznosi 17 posto, a gotovo polovica toga dolazi od sportskih napitaka sa zašećerenim gaziranim sokovima i pića s okusom voća. Smjernice ne uključuju šećere koji se prirodno nalaze u 100 % voćnim sokovima.

"Slatki napici su prazne kalorije i oni su nisko voće u borbi protiv pretilosti u djetinjstvu", rekla je dr Sheela Magge, pedijatrijski endokrinolog iz Dječijeg centra Johns Hopkins koja je učestvovala u izradi preporuka.

Ova izjava, koja je nastajala više od dvije godine, odražava rastući osjećaj hitnosti među ljekarima - i frustraciju zbog onoga što mnogi opisuju kao neaktivnost vlade usred nacionalne zdravstvene opasnosti.

"Vidjela sam dvogodišnjake sa masnom bolešću jetre i tinejdžere sa dijabetesom tipa 2", rekla je dr. Natalie Muth, kalifornijski pedijatar i vodeći autor preporuka. “To su bolesti koje smo viđali kod njihovih djedova i baka. To je frustrirajuće jer se mi kao pedijatri osjećamo kao da činimo sve što možemo, ali teško je konkurirati marketinškoj strategiji industrije gaziranih pića od 800 miliona dolara godišnje. "

Preporuke obuhvataju niz inicijativa, od kojih su neke neprovjerene - poput saveznih ograničenja oglašavanja nezdrave hrane - i mjera poput poreza na sodu koje su bile učinkovite u smanjenju potrošnje sode.

Većina će se vjerojatno suočiti s otporom moćne industrije pića, koja se energično borila protiv bilo kakvih vladinih napora da smanji potrošnju pića napunjenih šećerom.

Ipak, neke od prijedloga politika bilo bi relativno lako postići, poput povećanog finansiranja javnih obrazovnih programa kako bi se naglasila opasnost od prekomjerne konzumacije šećera ili promjena federalnog programa hrane koji opslužuje milione siromašne djece. Program dopunske prehrane, ili SNAP, plaća 20 miliona porcija slatkih pića dnevno, po godišnjoj cijeni od 4 milijarde dolara. Zabrana primateljima da koriste beneficije za kupovinu nezdravih pića, kažu istraživači, mogla bi spriječiti 52.000 smrtnih slučajeva od dijabetesa tipa 2.

Ostali mali, simbolični koraci koje preporučuju mogli bi imati ogroman utjecaj, poput poticanja zdravstvenih ustanova da uklone slatka pića s jelovnika i automata.

"Kao i sa zabranom duhana, vodstvo bolnica i zdravstveni planovi za ukidanje prodaje zašećerenih pića mogu poboljšati zdravlje njihovih zaposlenika, povećati svijest javnosti o doprinosu zašećerenih pića pretilosti i time promijeniti društvene norme" rekla je grupa.

William Dermody, glasnogovornik Američkog udruženja za piće, rekao je da se slatka pića nepravedno krive za nagli porast pretilosti i dijabetesa, te je rekao da postoje bolji načini za obeshrabrivanje konzumacije šećera među djecom. Industrija je, naglasio je, fokusirana na stvaranje zdravijih proizvoda, uključujući flaširanu vodu i pića s niskim šećerom, dio industrijske inicijative za smanjenje kalorija u pićima za 20 posto do 2025. godine.

"Američke kompanije za piće vjeruju da postoji bolji način za smanjenje količine šećera koji potrošači dobijaju od pića, a to uključuje stavljanje roditelja na mjesto vozača da odluče šta je najbolje za njihovu djecu", rekao je u saopćenju.

No, roditelji, posebno oni koji dugo rade, nisu uvijek u blizini kako bi provjerili šta njihova djeca piju. Kad su u pitanju tinejdžeri, izazov je još veći.

"Roditelji mogu učiniti samo toliko, posebno u jednoroditeljskim domaćinstvima", rekla je dr Magge iz Johns Hopkinsa.

Dr Jim Krieger, izvršni direktor Healthy Food America, rekao je da se industriji ne može vjerovati da nadzire potrošnju nezdravih proizvoda od kojih ovisi o svojoj dobiti.

Uzmimo, na primjer, inicijativu da se dobrovoljno smanji sadržaj šećera u pićima. Dr Krieger je rekao da su napori krenuli sporo, sa samo 3 posto smanjenja od početka napora 2014. godine.

Iako je u Sjedinjenim Državama potrošnja šećerne sode opala od 2000. godine, nedavni podaci ukazuju na to da je pad u posljednjih nekoliko godina porastao, a stope su i dalje tvrdoglavo visoke u siromašnim zajednicama, a posebno među adolescentima manjina. Prema Centrima za kontrolu i prevenciju bolesti, stopa pretilosti je gotovo 19 posto među najsiromašnijim Amerikancima u dobi od 2 do 19 godina, što je za osam postotnih bodova više od onih u bogatijim zajednicama.

Federalne studije također su pokazale da kompanije za piće troše nerazmjerno velik dio svog marketinškog dolara na kampanje usmjerene na mlade iz manjinskih zajednica, a istraživači kažu da su takvi oglasi u porastu posljednjih godina unatoč dobrovoljnoj inicijativi u cijeloj industriji za smanjenje oglasa za nezdrave proizvode.

Mnogi zagovornici javnog zdravlja zatražili su federalnu regulaciju, slično kao i pravilo iz 1971. godine koje je zabranjivalo oglase cigareta na radiju i televiziji. Ljekarska udruženja priznala su da bi se takva ograničenja suočila s teškom bitkom, ali su predložila da bi Kongres mogao izmijeniti porezne zakone koji dozvoljavaju kompanijama za piće da odbiju troškove oglašavanja nezdrave hrane i pića.

Državne vlade, dodale su, mogle bi donijeti pravila koja zabranjuju marketing takve hrane u školama i oko njih, a proizvođačima slatkih pića zabranjuju sponzoriranje sportskih događaja za mlade.

No, kada je u pitanju suzbijanje žara za slatkim pićima, medicinske grupe kažu da veći porezi obećavaju promjenu navika. Od Meksika do Čilea i od Philadelphije do Berkeleyja u Kaliforniji, uvođenje poreza na sodu posljednjih godina dovelo je do značajnog pada potrošnje sode, pri čemu je porez od 10 posto u prosjeku povezan sa padom potrošnje od 7 posto, tvrde istraživači.

Druga studija je pokazala da bi porezi na sodu, ako se uvedu, mogli spriječiti više od pola miliona slučajeva pretilosti u djetinjstvu.

Preporuke medicinskih udruženja priznaju da bi porezi na sodu nesrazmjerno utjecali na siromašne, ali da bi takve zajednice imale koristi ako se prihod potroši na poboljšanje ranog obrazovanja i programe koji subvencioniraju cijene zdrave hrane i pića.

Benjamin Winig, potpredsjednik za pravo i politiku u ChangeLab Solutions, zagovaračkoj grupi, rekao je da se nada da će nove preporuke pomoći u izgradnji političke volje potrebne za prevladavanje sve snažnijeg pritiska proizvođača pića.

Suočena s porastom lokalnih poreza na sodu, industrija podržava takozvane preventivne zakone na državnom nivou koji zabranjuju opštinama da stvaraju poreze na hranu i piće. Napor je bio uspješan u državama uključujući Kaliforniju, Michigan i Washington.

Na kraju je ipak rekao da su lokalne općine u najboljoj poziciji za rješavanje rastuće krize gojaznosti kod djece.

"Javna zdravstvena zajednica pobjeđuje, ali to je vrlo teška bitka", rekao je. “Naša djeca se razboljevaju i umiru, a ono što nam zaista treba je da vlada pojača svoju misiju kako bi zaštitila ljude.”


Irski soda hleb

  • 4 šolje brašna
  • ½ šolje šećera
  • 1 tsp. soli
  • 2 kašičice. brašno
  • ½ šolje putera
  • 2 šolje grožđica bez koštica
  • 1 ½ šolje mlaćenice (ili zamijenite punomasno mlijeko sa 1 kašikom jabukovog sirćeta po šolji mlijeka)
  • 1 jaje
  • ½ kašičice. soda bikarbona

Grožđice pirjajte u šerpi sa vrelom vodom. Pomiješajte i prosijte brašno, šećer, sol i prašak za pecivo. Radite na maslacu vrhovima prstiju sve dok ne podsjeća na krupno kukuruzno brašno. Umiješajte ocijeđene grožđice. Pomiješajte mlaćenicu, jaje, sodu bikarbonu. Umiješajte smjesu mlaćenice u smjesu brašna dok se samo ne navlaži. Ne miješajte previše. Peći u podmazanoj srednjoj posudi za pečenje na 375 stepeni 40 do 45 minuta.

Ovo smatram receptom od sode sa bakom Gibbons sa sodom, a ja sam ga prilagodila receptu koji je moja teta Pat dala u svoju kuharicu prije mnogo godina. Ali teta Pat mi kaže da je to uzela od moje tetke Maureen sa Linchove strane porodice. Pa je prenosim i s Gibbonsesa i sa Lynches -a iz okruga Mayo.


Pozivamo sve ljubitelje Coca-Cole: Evo 9 slatkih i slanih recepata koje biste trebali isprobati sada

Prošetajte bilo kojim prolazom u trgovini i šanse su da Coca-Cola ima vrhunski položaj među bezbroj gaziranih pića na prodaju-i to s dobrim razlogom.

Južno bazirani div soda koji je prvi put debitirao je klasično piće s okusom tamne karamele 1886. Od tada se Coca-Cola razgranala tako da uključuje i druge okuse poput naranče, trešnje, vanilije i naravno nevjerojatno popularne dijetetske verzije.

Premda je vrhunac ledeno hladne Coca-Cole postao sinonim za osvježavajući odmor i opuštanje, soda takođe čini tajni sastojak nekih od naših omiljenih jela i koktela. Od glaziranih krila do kolača od blata u Mississippiju, mogućnosti su zaista beskrajne.

Evo nekoliko naših apsolutno omiljenih načina korištenja Coca-Cole u kuhinji.


Zastakljena krila Coca-Cole
Prema riječima kuhara Jeffreyja Gardnera, "ključanje Coca-Cole isparava svu višak vode u sodu ostavljajući za sobom gusti sirup nalik melasi. U ovoj fazi koncentrirana koka-kola praktički moli da se koristi kao glazura na roštilju ili pečenoj meso, posebno pileća krilca. Kako se soda smanjuje, dodavanjem aromata poput češnjaka, đumbira ili paprike jalapeño dodatnu će složenost dodati. Dodajte nekoliko snimaka tamnog octa, poput šerija ili balzamika, kako biste umaku dali više zip -a i bolje ravnoteže . Samo pažljivo pratite sos kako ga ne biste prekomjerno smanjili ili opekli. "
Uzmi recept

Rebra za bebe sa ostakljenjem Coca Cole
Šta će se dogoditi ako dodate Coca-Colu u domaći umak za roštilj s okusom velike količine melase? Čista magija. Ovo preuzimanje slatkih i zadimljenih rebara s roštilja u kombinaciji s ljetnim klasikom koji vam čak ni sada nije trebao. Ovdje Coca-Cola radi s ljepljivom melasom kako bi stvorila umake koji se doslovno lijepe po rebrima i koje ćete cijelu večeru lizati s prstiju.
Uzmi recept


Coca-Cola pržena junetina
Ovaj recept za briškule inspiriran jugom savršen je tokom cijele godine. Brisket je komad govedine koji se treba kuhati nisko i polako. Kuhanjem u kadi slatke Coca-Cole uparuje se slano-slano meso sa slatkoćom koka-kole, octa i slatkog luka. Ako želite bogatiji umak, uklonite grudvu nakon kuhanja i smanjite tekućinu za pirjanje dok se ne zgusne po vašem ukusu.
Uzmi recept

Grah pečen od burbona i koksa
Bourbon i Coca -Cola su već klasično ukusan par. Dodajte slani pečeni pasulj i ono što imate je sirupasti slatki pasulj koji predstavlja ozbiljan udarac. Vaši gosti možda neće moći identificirati "tajne sastojke" u ovom pečenom zrnu, ali svidjet će im se da su tu burbon i Coca Cola. Pretvorite ga u glavno jelo posluživanjem s kukuruznim hljebom. Pretvorite ovo u vegetarijansko ili vegansko jelo koristeći vegetarijanski pečeni pasulj, eliminirajući mljeveno goveđe meso i miješajući 12 unci zamjene za meso koja se mrvi u posljednjih 20 minuta vremena pečenja.
Uzmi recept


Coca-Cola glazirana šunka
Autorka kuhinje i kuharica Virginia Willis upoznata je s ovom posebno južnjačkom kombinacijom, jer je njezina baka napravila sličnu verziju. Ona je komentirala: "Slatkoća Coca-Cole odlično se udaje uz blago slanu šunku." Ona ističe da se u ovom receptu koristi kuhana šunka koja je zapravo spremna za jelo bez daljnjeg kuhanja. Rekla je: "Ove šunke često se označavaju kao" potpuno skuhane "," spremne za jelo "ili" zagrijte i poslužite ". Mogu se jesti takve kakve jesu, ali se češće zagrijavaju na unutarnju temperaturu od 140 stupnjeva radi punijeg okusa." Jedna mala prilagodba: Willis je prepekao šunku neposredno prije posluživanja kako bi joj dao lijepu karameliziranu vanjštinu.
Uzmi recept

Coca-Cola Sloppy Joes
Najpoznatiji napitak na jugu dobro će vam doći kada pokušavate smisliti što ćete s pakiranjem goveđeg mesa jučer u tjednu, a da pritom ne izvučete cijelu policu sa začinima. Laganim pokretom pop -topa dodaje slatkiš od karamele i papreni začin neurednoj Joe mešavini koja takođe sadrži mleveno goveđe ili ćureće meso (išli smo sa pticom), luk i sos sa roštilja. Nije dovoljno začinjeno za vaš ukus? Istresite u ljuti sos. Obrok zaokružite salatom od kupusa - bilo iz delikatesnog ili domaćeg (koristeći mješavinu slatkog mesa u vrećicama i obučenu majonezom, malo šećera i mrvicom octa). Poslužite ga sa strane ili, kao što smo mi radili, unutar lepinje sa mješavinom mesa. Ništa ih ne nazivamo traljavim.
Uzmi recept


Coca-Cola torta

Za Coca-Cola tortu koja zaista ima okus sode, smanjili smo (samo malo) šećer uklanjanjem tradicionalnog sljeza. Pekane prepečemo i pri vrhu, i umjesto da ih umiješamo u glazuru, po tradiciji, posipamo ih po vrhu. Ostavljanje dobre četvrtine šolje oraha jedva isjeckanih daje kolaču malo teksture, umanjuje dio slatkoće i pomaže da se oslobodi svojstvene gorčine sode. Konačno, u glazuru ulijte samo jedan dodir više kokaina nego što je tipično, dajući mu konzistenciju za kapanje i odvažan okus kola. Probušenje rupa na vrhu kolača, prijedlog čitatelja, pomaže da se glazura upije u kolač, dodatno pojačavajući okus i vlagu. Ali, hej, ako mislite da smo ludi što se petljamo u dobru stvar, samo naprijed i dodajte svoje minijaturne mlazne mlaznice kako želite. Rastopit će se u tijestu i dodati, da, još slatkoće. U svakom slučaju, na kraju ćete dobiti nevjerojatno vlažan i pomalo ljepljiv kolač sa prepoznatljivim okusom koji miriše na jug.
Uzmi recept

Mississippi Mud Cake
Uzevši u obzir gusniju i mnogo neuredniju pitu od blata u Mississippiju, ova torta od blata je laka čokoladna torta prelivena marshmallowom i slatkom čokoladnom glazurom. Odlučili smo izostaviti opcionalne pekane kako ne bismo previše zašli u područje stjenovitih cesta. Bilo koji recept za čokoladnu tortu poslužit će kao osnova, ali volimo Coca-Cola tortu zbog njene lakoće i ukrštenih sastojaka. A Coca-Cola je ipak ukusna!
Uzmi recept


Odrasli Jack i Coca-Cola

Ovaj ukusni highball koktel odrasla je verzija klasičnog južnjačkog pića, Jack and Cola. Grenčice melase i angosture nagovještavaju Coca-Colu, dok vaš omiljeni burbon (ili Jack Daniels, ako želite) pruža oomph. Dopunite sve to sa sodom i malo limete.
Uzmi recept

Fotografija (Coca-Cola Wings): Ryan Hughley
Fotografija: Brisket, Coca-Cola torta, Jack i Coca-Cola: Ramona King
Fotografija (Ham): Shardayyy Photography


Kako je jedna od najdebljih zemalja na svijetu preuzela divove sode

M exicans obožavaju svoju gaziranu vodu. Građevinski radnici rano ujutro odlaze na posao držeći ogromne dvolitarske ili čak trolitarske boce. Bebe u kolicima sisaju bočice napunjene sodom naranče. U visoravnima Chiapas smatra se da Coca-Cola ima magične moći i koristi se u vjerskim obredima.

Zapravo, Meksikanci piju više sode nego gotovo bilo tko drugi u svijetu, njihova prva tri dnevna izvora kalorija u 2012. bila su visokokalorična pića. Meksiko također ima daleko najveću svjetsku smrtnost od hroničnih bolesti uzrokovanih konzumacijom slatkih pića-gotovo tri puta veću od one koja je na drugom mjestu, u Južnoj Africi. Drugim riječima, pretjerana konzumacija sode ubija dvostruko više Meksikanaca nego trgovina drugom vrstom koksa po kojoj je Meksiko poznat.

Ali Meksiko također voli industriju sode. Vicente Fox, koji je 2000. postao prvi demokratski izabran predsjednik zemlje, ranije je bio predsjednik Coca-Cole u Meksiku, a zatim šef operacija kompanije u Latinskoj Americi. Simbolika je bila vrijedna pažnje: kompanije za proizvodnju sode - posebno Coca -Cole, koja kontrolira 73% meksičkog tržišta (u usporedbi sa samo 42% u SAD -u) - imale su izvanredan utjecaj na zdravstvenu politiku u Meksiku.

Posljedice ovoga postale su očite 2006. godine, kada je objavljeno meksičko Nacionalno istraživanje zdravlja i prehrane otkrilo da se dijabetes - vodeći uzrok smrti u zemlji - udvostručio od 2000. godine. Između 1999. i 2006. godine, prosječna veličina struka među ženama u reproduktivnoj dobi povećana za skoro 11 cm. I u istom periodu, pretilost među djecom od pet do 11 godina porasla je za 40%. Nijedna druga država na svijetu nije doživjela porast pretilosti takvih razmjera - Meksiko je bio na putu da postane najdeblja velika zemlja.

Statistika pretilosti iz 2006. zvučala je alarmantno u Meksiku. Tadašnji ministar zdravlja, José Ángel Córdova Villalobos, obratio se Juanu Riveri, osnivačkom direktoru Centra za istraživanje prehrane i zdravlja pri meksičkom Nacionalnom institutu za javno zdravlje - možda najistaknutijem naučniku o prehrani u zemlji - i zamolio ga za preporuke za borbu protiv epidemija gojaznosti.

Rivera laid out a programme, involving various parts of the government, to educate the public, encourage behaviour change, and regulate advertising, among other things. “That’s very complicated,” Córdova said. “You’re an academic. I’m a politician – I’m very pragmatic. Choose one thing.”

Reduce soda consumption, Rivera replied. The health survey showed that soda intake had more than doubled among adolescents between 1999 and 2006, and nearly tripled among women. So Rivera worked with a group of Mexican and US nutritionists to produce a diagram shaped like a jug with layers of various drinks to illustrate the ideal balance for daily beverage intake. The idea was to put a poster with the jug in every health centre. “It never happened,” said Rivera. “Opposition from the industry was tremendous.”

As Mexico began to grapple with obesity, and soda’s role in it, the industry began to counterattack with the argument it uses everywhere that soda is under siege. “Obesity comes from taking in more calories than you spend,” said Jaime Zabludovsky, chair of the board of ConMexico, the processed food and beverage producers’ group. “If Michael Phelps eats 5,000 calories a day and swims 10km, there is no problem. If you eat 2,000 calories per day but don’t move, you have a problem. The source can be soda, tortillas, chocolate, sandwiches, fritanga, bagels – there is not any product that in itself causes obesity.”

The idea of balancing calories in with calories out is now the mantra of the soda industry worldwide. An active lifestyle is the solution – not dietary change, and certainly not soda taxes.

Coca-Cola Mexico had been sponsoring youth sporting events for 17 years, but its efforts intensified after 2006 – the next year, for example, Coca-Cola and the government began “Ponte al 100”, a programme to promote the habit of exercise. And since an active life is what matters, who better to help than the industry that knows how to promote sporting events? “We are part of the solution,” said Jorge Terrazas, head of Anprac, Mexico’s beverage industry group.

The soda industry’s contention that activity can protect us from obesity and diabetes is not borne out by research, which has shown again and again that diet is a far more important factor in obesity than exercise. And over the last two decades, the Mexican diet has been transformed. Consumption of beans dropped by half. In the last 14 years, consumption of fruit and vegetables dropped by 30% – largely replaced by processed food and sugar-sweetened beverages.

In part due to the North American Free Trade Agreement, which took effect in 1994, the availability of processed food has soared. Even in the most remote villages, little stores sell packaged biscuits, pastries, doughnuts and cakes, and sodas and non-carbonated sweetened drinks. When you’re hungry, you can buy a Gansito snack cake and a soda for about a dollar. It’s fast and cheap and delicious.

The evidence is overwhelming that excess sugar consumption is the largest factor in the global obesity epidemic. Excess sugar is also by far the most important driver of diabetes, even among thin people: you need not be overweight to get diabetes. And soda is the worst source of sugar. The high concentration causes a spike in blood glucose. The body responds with a flood of insulin, which in turn can lead to fatty liver disease and diabetes. Also, liquid calories don’t trigger satiety. After eating 200 calories of a Gansito cake, you are less hungry. After 200 calories of soda, you are not.

What keeps soda executives up at night is the spectre of a soda tax. They don’t worry about lost revenue or sales from a tax – it’s the demonisation of their product. Soda is on the verge of becoming the liquid cigarette. So the industry seeks to break the link between soda and disease, and backs research to support that view. Its companies cultivate a health-conscious image – a tactic that, conveniently, also sells beverages. Coca-Cola’s promotion of thousands of sporting events in Mexico is also a key marketing and advertising strategy. And if they can’t actually win friends, companies spend like crazy to buy them. There was a time when Philip Morris and British American Tobacco did all these things, too. It only put off the inevitable. Sodamakers have a dilemma: every effort to avoid becoming the tobacco industry makes them look more like the tobacco industry.

When the government headed by President Enrique Peña Nieto proposed a soda tax in September 2013, it took the industry by surprise. While the industry had lavished its attention on the health sector, the tax proposal had come from Mexico’s finance ministry – part of a larger package of fiscal reforms. “Tax” was the important word, not “soda”.

But the industry’s shock quickly gave way to confidence. As obesity and diabetes rates soar around the world, a soda tax is one of the top recommendations of global health experts. Several European countries have some version of a tax. But in the rest of the world, the soda industry has kept them at bay. Some 30 jurisdictions in the US have tried to pass taxes or controls on soda all failed. President Obama considered proposing one in 2009, and it had substantial congressional support, but the might of the soda industry killed it.

In Mexico, the soda industry responded with more than arguments about exercise – it responded with money. To appreciate the reach of soda industry funds, consider an unremarkable public event that took place in July 2013 – a few months before Mexico’s congress debated the soda tax. On 8 July, the Mexican Diabetes Association’s branch in Monterrey hosted a talk by Jorge A Mendoza López, a local exercise scientist, called “Physical activity for people living with diabetes”.

Only one thing about the talk was of note: it was sponsored by Coca-Cola. Mendoza was the first head of the Mexican branch of a global organisation called Exercise Is Medicine (EIM). The group’s first founding corporate partner is Coca-Cola. According to Exercise Is Medicine’s annual report, Coca-Cola also provided logistical support for Mendoza López’s talk.

Dr María Guadalupe Fabián San Miguel is on the board of EIM. She participated in a press conference in December 2012, to denounce the idea of a soda tax. “Let’s not punish companies with taxes,” she said. “The solution isn’t to demonise business, but to educate people.”

Dr Mercedes Juan López, Mexico’s health secretary, argued against the soda tax. Photograph: Carlos Tischler/Demotix/Corbis

A similar argument against the soda tax was made by Dr Mercedes Juan López. “The important thing is to educate people so they’re aware of the health effects, because you can’t force anyone not to drink soda,” she said in March 2013. “No food is harmful if consumed in moderation.” She admitted that a tax might lower soda consumption, but, she added, “Cigarettes are taxed, and some people still smoke.”

Many people in Mexico held these views. What made these women remarkable was not their medical degrees but their positions: when Fabián San Miguel attacked the proposed soda tax, she was the medical director of the Mexican Diabetes Federation. And Juan López was, and still is, Mexico’s health secretary.

Before becoming minister, Juan López chaired the board of the Fundación Mexicana para la Salud, the Mexican Health Foundation. She was one of many health officials to go into the government from FunSalud, as the foundation is known. FunSalud dominates health policy in Mexico – and has been a longtime critic of attempts to limit Mexicans’ soda consumption and a longtime friend of the soda and processed food industries. FunSalud’s nutrition project is the Nestlé Nutrition Fund (Juan was a member of the fund’s consultative committee). Its child obesity project is financed by the Coca-Cola Export Corporation and Peñafiel, a Mexican manufacturer of soda and mineral water that is part of the Dr Pepper Snapple Group.

I called the Mexican Diabetes Federation and asked to interview Fabián San Miguel. I was sent instead to Marco Villalvazo, who runs the federation’s programme to train diabetes educators. Villalvazo is also one of eight medical experts in Mexico who participate in Together for Wellness, a programme sponsored by Grupo Milenio media company, Coca-Cola Mexico and Coca-Cola’s Beverage Institute for Health and Wellness.

Unsurprisingly, Villalvazo didn’t think much of the soda tax. “Education is what matters,” he said. “Obesity and diabetes are multi-factorial illnesses – one can’t demonise one product alone as causing these epidemics. Raising the cost doesn’t work.” I asked him why the chief educator for the Mexican Diabetes Federation also works with Coca-Cola. “There is a part of Coca-Cola that makes mineral water and non-sugared beverages,” he said. “That’s the ethical part of Coke. I was working with them in my personal capacity to make short films about hydration.” He said he was not paid for his participation.

Villalvazo has a lot of company. Mexico’s National Council on Science and Technology recently announced a new prize to support research in public health. Its partners are the Coca-Cola Foundation and the Beverage Institute.

Virtually every government panel on fighting obesity includes Coca-Cola, and often other food companies. Armando Ahued Ortega, Mexico City’s secretary of health, has often warned that diabetes is causing the collapse of Mexico’s health system. And dialysis (kidney failure is a major consequence of diabetes) isn’t even covered. If it were, the health system could pay for nothing else. “There goes everything else social security covers – cataracts, cancer, everything,” Ahued said in 2013. Yet the same year he and Mexico City’s mayor presented Coca-Cola with its Health Conscious Organisation award for its “promotion of active lifestyles”.

On the Facebook page of the Monterrey diabetes association, among the 13 organisations the group “likes” are Oxxo, which is Coca-Cola’s chain of convenience stores, and Femsa, Coke’s major Mexican bottler, the largest Coke bottler in the world. Why does a diabetes association “like” a Coke bottler?

It had given the association a large amount of diabetic supplies, said Maribel García Méndez, the director of the association. One of Coke’s other Mexican bottlers, Arca Continental, had provided money for a camp for kids with diabetes. They helped her solve the problem that keeps her up at night: raising money. “I understand that it’s a thin line,” she said. “Most of the [diabetes] organisations receive help from these types of institutions. We accept it because it’s no-strings-attached, and done in the open. The problem is so complex that we have to link ourselves to people who are ready to help – civil society, government and businesses.”

This is not just a Mexican phenomenon. Coke has given millions of dollars to various health organisations in the US, including dieticians’ and paediatricians’ groups. But a backlash has begun, and some are severing their relationship with Coke. Not so in Mexico – and industry money has a far greater impact in countries, such as Mexico, where everyone who works in health stays up at night worrying about money.

Yet the month after proposing a soda tax, Peña Nieto signed it into law. The soda industry was confounded by three things: a government desperate for tax money, the rise of civic groups that creatively countered the industry’s political pressure, and a giant infusion of cash.

After Mexico, the British overseas territory of Saint Helena passed a tax, then Berkeley, California – an island in its own way – then the US Navajo nation, then Chile, then Barbados. Many more countries are contemplating following. In Britain the conversation had been largely a soliloquy conducted by Jamie Oliver, who has raised the price of soda in his restaurants, with the money going to children’s anti-obesity programmes. Now, however, even the British Medical Association has endorsed a soda tax and Public Health England, a government body, just released a report recommending one, among many other measures.

Around the world, people are watching Mexico. Activists want to know how their Mexican counterparts did it. Governments seek evidence on the tax’s effects. As for the soda companies, they are looking at Mexico and asking how the hell it happened. And, they fear, if it could happen in Mexico, then it could happen anywhere.

When the 2006 nutrition study came out, Alejandro Calvillo was starting a new organisation that he called El Poder del Consumidor – Consumer Power. Calvillo was not interested in traditional consumer advocacy work, collecting stories of fraud or bad service. He had spent 12 years at Greenpeace Mexico, five as its leader, and he founded El Poder to be a kind of Greenpeace for consumers – to fight industry pressure and win pro-consumer policies.

“We had lived till 2000 with one party in power for more than 70 years,” Calvillo said. Before Vicente Fox became president in 2000, the Institutional Revolutionary party (PRI) had won every election since 1929. “The PRI had enormous control. Civil participation was very difficult to build – we lacked practice in democracy. It was important to create citizenship, and I felt a consumer organisation worked on issues that are very immediate for people.”

Calvillo is 57, a philosopher by education. He is an unlikely leader and spokesperson for a movement: sober, soft-spoken, thoughtful. In what is still a formal society, he wears jeans to press conferences. He looks profoundly uncomfortable being interviewed, but he looks uncomfortable a good deal of the time. He knew that El Poder needed to focus on just a few fields. The national nutrition study infuriated Calvillo, particularly the rise in child obesity. Food would become one of El Poder’s areas of work, alongside transport. What Calvillo was trying was radically new.

“There is no tradition in Mexico of listening to civil society on the issue of food,” said Rivera. “Industry is seen as really important they have to be consulted. But it’s been very rare that anyone talks to civil society. The tradition here is that aristocrats don’t talk to anyone who isn’t of their social class. Civil society is seen as making trouble.

“Well, it’s true: they are troublemakers,” he said, smiling. “But a democratic society has to listen to them.”

El Poder gradually amassed victories. It created an informal network of sister organisations – groups that worked on health, environment, small agriculture, indigenous rights – which now form the Nutritional Health Alliance. Calvillo and his compadres played a major role in winning new official recommendations to keep junk food out of schools, and a government promise to limit advertising on children’s television.

El Poder brought focus, organisation and a voice to the issue of Mexico’s diet. What it couldn’t bring was money. El Poder’s headquarters is in a working-class neighbourhood in Mexico City’s south, a few doors from Calvillo’s house, with roosters, cobbled streets and colourful murals in 2008, when funds were about to run out, he kept the organisation alive by selling his family’s car. El Poder has received small grants from Oxfam UK and the Heinrich Boll Foundation (associated with the German Green party). Calvillo had also been given a personal grant from Ashoka, a US “incubator” for social entrepreneurship.He and his wife, Elaine Kemp, who designs El Poder’s campaigns and documents, eventually had enough money to buy another car. (Calvillo still travels mostly by microbus and metro – highly unusual for Mexican elites.) But raising the kind of money required to defeat the soda industry in a fight over taxes seemed impossible – until Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire mayor of New York City and food nanny to the world, stepped in.

The World Health Organisation calls soda taxes the most effective strategy for improving diet (along with subsidising fruit and vegetables). The evidence that a soda tax can reduce obesity and disease, however, comes largely from theoretical models.

Soda taxes are hard to study. It’s difficult to isolate their effects, since countries tax many foods. In the few years before Mexico passed its tax, Finland, France, Hungary and a handful of smaller countries and jurisdictions put new taxes on soda – but all three countries also taxed diet soda or mineral water (their aim was revenue, not health). Thirsty shoppers in Finland, France and Hungary have no economic incentive to avoid sugary drinks.

The available evidence shows that soda taxes reduce consumption – and when they are removed, as in Denmark in 2013, consumption rises – although studies suggest that a tax of less than 20% has only a small effect. What is harder to determine is the impact on obesity and disease, in part because there are so few cases where soda taxes have been passed.

No failure to pass limits on soda has inspired as much schadenfreude as New York City’s. When he was mayor, Bloomberg tried to ban cups larger than 16 ounces (473ml), but the courts overturned the ban after a fierce campaign by the industry – which had the support of some unlikely allies, including the Hispanic Federation and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), both of which had received Coke money. The conservative commentator Jeff Stier summed up one widely held view of Bloomberg’s policies: a “meddling, busy-body approach”.

You bet, says Bloomberg. In 2011, Bloomberg’s charitable foundation, already a major funder of tobacco control programmes in low- and middle-income countries, decided to take on soda. Mexico was alluring, especially since a new president was about to take over. The foundation, called Bloomberg Philanthropies, looks for strong local organisations to partner with, and Calvillo’s group was an obvious choice. “Experts around the world talked about Alejandro and how strong El Poder was,” said Kelly Henning, who runs the foundation’s public health programmes. “He really looks to the evidence, and is a very good collaborator with others.”

In 2012, Bloomberg Philanthropies began a $10m, three-year programme in Mexico to reduce soda consumption. For the first time, the financial power of Mexico’s soda industry faced a serious challenge.

On a sunny morning this July, Calvillo stood in a light-washed classroom at the National Institute of Public Health to dissect the soda tax campaign. Anabel Velasco, a researcher there, had invited him to speak to her graduate students in nutrition. As he stood in front of the class he seemed totally at ease. Here, he was a rock star. After the talk, students came up to him to show him their own research or give him a résumé.

For the first six years of El Poder’s life, the group publicised its issues only through free media coverage. Calvillo gave, and still gives, nerdy press conferences, showing slides with numerous footnotes, and he often begins interviews with a recitation of facts and figures.

But he alternates wonkery with street theatre. In 2012, for example, reporters were invited to gather outside the offices of Mexico’s health authority. An actor dressed like one of the polar bears that figure in Coke ads limped up, wearing a prosthesis on one paw, a dialysis bag and tubing. He was carrying a bottle of soda, which he poured into a rubbish bucket. At least 41 outlets covered the stunt, including China’s national news agency.

Six months later, Calvillo and his colleagues in the Nutritional Health Alliance dressed actors like police, who came out, faces obscured, to announce the arrest of the capos of the “Junk Cartel” for the crimes of manipulating and tricking children. The criminals included the polar bear, alias “La Coca”, Tony the Tiger, alias “El Tigre” or “the Lord of Sugar”, and Ronald McDonald, alias “El Payaso” – the clown. Four actors in costumes were then paraded in front of reporters in handcuffs. That, too, got widespread publicity.

The Bloomberg money allowed Calvillo to buy ads for the first time. The alliance created a very sober ad featuring doctors talking about children with diabetes. It requested space for the ad on the popular 10.30pm news programme of Televisa, Mexico’s major TV network. “Sorry, no space,” Televisa replied – and there was no space on any of the channel’s other programmes either.

The alliance was also refused at Mexico’s other major broadcast network, TV Azteca, at the cable network Milenio TV, and at a major outdoor advertising chain, which at least gave a reason, Calvillo said: it had a policy of not upsetting important clients. (A spokesman for TV Azteca said the ad was rejected because the doctors did not display their professional licences on screen, and the images were too graphic. Other media did not respond to inquiries.)

But the cable networks Fox Sports and CNN took the ad, and it went on YouTube – “see what the networks censored!” – where it got a quarter of a million hits.

‘The ad that came to symbolise the campaign was called 12 Spoonfuls’. Photograph: Nutritional Health Alliance

The ad that came to symbolise the campaign was called “12 Spoonfuls”. “We had been doing nutritional workshops with parents, and they were always shocked to learn how much sugar was in a soda – the least of them had 12 spoonfuls,” said Calvillo.

This turned into a poster showing a hand thrusting a soda at two children. “Would you give them 12 spoonfuls of sugar?” asks the text. “Then why would you give them a soda?”

In one of the TV spots, a couple sat with a bowl of sugar in front of their unwilling daughter, using every parental “open wide” trick to spoon sugar into her mouth. Focus groups conducted recently – two years after the campaign – showed that nearly everyone still remembered these ads.

As Calvillo showed the students his ads, a middle-aged student raised her hand. “Is that true? Twelve spoonfuls?”

Calvillo smiled. “Delaware Punch has 15,” he said. There were gasps from the students.

The soda industry fought back against Calvillo’s campaign mainly with ads promoting what has now become its global theme: balance your calories with exercise. Other ads focused on the economic consequences: Fernando Ponce, then head of Anprac, the beverage industry association, warned that 10,000 jobs would be lost in the short term, and 20,000 in the medium term.

But the industry’s most interesting tactic was to focus on Bloomberg himself: poster and newspaper ads referred to the tax as “the Bloomberg tax” and “a tax promoted from a foreign country”.

“Alejandro Calvillo complains about multinationals, but receives money from the US,” warned one ad. “And you? Are you going to let a gringo tell you what to consume? What are Michael Bloomberg’s real interests in Mexico? A gringo wants to charge you the taxes he couldn’t charge there. What interests are behind El Poder del Consumidor?”

The alliance’s own research (paid for, of course, by Bloomberg ) showed that these ads had little impact: an anti-gringo strategy is apparently not effective for an industry commanded by Coca-Cola. In fact, that strategy was a better fit for Calvillo’s side. Mexico is the one country that rivals France in its resentment of US cultural and corporate dominance, which has reached new heights since Nafta. Mexican small agriculture is dying, replaced by big agribusiness. The Mexican indigenous diet is disappearing with it.

For the alliance, the soda tax was a way to promote both health and Mexicanness. Calvillo talks about encouraging Mexicans to go back to the traditional Mesoamerican diet of fruit, vegetables and grains such as amaranth — “considered one of the best in the world,” he said.

For some of Calvillo’s allies in the alliance, revitalising the traditional Mexican diet was their major goal. One was Yatziri Zepeda, an environmental economist, who runs Proyecto AliMente – which she finances with her part-time research job.

Zepeda’s passion for a soda tax came in part from the three years she lived in Chiapas, the poorest state in Mexico – and the land of Coca-Cola. Indigenous regions of Chiapas have the highest rates of Coca-Cola consumption in Mexico, possibly in the world. Billboards on the outskirts of towns show a woman in native dress holding a Coke bottle, with “Welcome to Zinacantán” at the top and the Coca-Cola slogan “Open happiness” below. Coke is used in religious rites burping rids the body of evil spirits. In Chiapas highland churches, Coke bottles line the aisles and even decorate the altars.

“We aren’t speaking out against soda,” Zepeda said. But she is trying to promote and celebrate alternative traditional drinks. In April she and colleagues organised a festival of pozol, an indigenous corn drink, the kickoff of a campaign called, “It’s healthier to eat like Mexicans.” In the highland town of San Juan Chamula, villagers gathered to listen to music and get reacquainted with native foods and drinks.

The most enthusiastic taster at the gathering, however, was far from home: Jamie Oliver, who came to film his anti-sugar documentary Jamie’s Sugar Rush. “Mexico doesn’t need to look outside its doors to find a solution to diabetes and obesity,” he declared to the crowd, holding a cup of pozol high. “The solution is right here, in-house, and it’s traditional foods.”

The irony is that ancient Mexican cuisine has never been more fashionable – but in the sleek restaurants of Mexico City, not the highlands of Chiapas. “Traditional Mexican cuisine is so relevant in privileged communities,” said Zepeda. “But in rural communities, everything from here is not cool.”

The Mexican congress is normally home turf for beverage industry executives and lobbyists here they are among friends. “When we want help with a campaign, they are here to help,” said Marcela Torres Peimbert, a senator from the pro-business National Action party (PAN) – which was almost uniformly against the tax. Although Peña Nieto’s party, the PRI, is famous for its discipline, many PRI legislators didn’t like their president’s proposal either many people they represent work in bottling and selling soda, and the PRI also received soda industry largesse.

Mexico’s leftist party, the PRD, did support the tax. And the industry had never before faced an opposition with Bloomberg money. “That levelled the playing field,” said Ricky Arango, who heads Polithink, a hip public-interest lobbying firm Bloomberg hired to persuade legislators. “It allowed us to compete one-on-one with the beverage industry. Without it we would not have had money for polls and publicity.”

Torres Peimbert became the tax’s most unlikely champion, though her party, the PAN, opposed the tax: she was not a businessperson but a psychotherapist, and her uncle had diabetes. “But every family has a relative with diabetes.” She said the president of the Mexican senate, Miguel Barboza, just had his right foot amputated.

Torres, with the support of the Nutritional Health Alliance, first proposed a tax of two pesos (8p) per litre, but they knew it would be bargained down. “It was convenient for the government that I’m a legislator from the opposition,” Torres said. “It’s difficult to ask for a tax hike, but it’s different when it’s civil society asking and I was their spokesperson. But my party criticised me. They said, ‘We’ll be blamed for the tax and the PRI will get the money to spend.’ In my state, the owners of the bottling plants don’t talk to me.”

She sniffed. “I don’t miss them.”

The beverage industry was so fearful of having soda singled out for demonisation that it proposed changing the tax to a levy on sugar. The rest of the food industry was furious, according to Jaime Zabludovsky, chairman of the board of the industry group ConMexico. The soda industry dropped the proposal. Legislators, however, thought so much of the idea that they proposed expanding the soda tax to junk food.

‘The government’s strategy for combating obesity and diabetes was heavy on exercise promotion.’ Photograph: Alamy

Polithink needed to convince legislators it was politically safe to vote for a tax increase. The group hired an independent polling firm, which asked people: would you support a tax if the money went to drinking fountains in schools? (This was disingenuous, as you cannot earmark tax money in Mexico, and in fact, the drinking fountain programme is only now getting started.) In large part because of Calvillo’s public campaign, polls found that 70% of the public supported the soda tax, and an even higher percentage agreed it would change their behaviour.

On 31 October, Peña Nieto announced the new one peso-per-litre soda tax (equal to about 10% of the pre-tax price), and an 8% tax on junk food, in a ceremony unveiling a new strategy for combating obesity and diabetes. The plan was heavy on exercise promotion and has produced ubiquitous (and ineffective) posters of young, slim, smiling Mexicans pointing at the camera and saying, “Go to your clinic and have a checkup today!” On the stage with Peña Nieto at the ceremony was Brian Smith, president of the Latin America Group at Coca-Cola. Smith talked about Coke’s nutritional education and promotion of physical activity, including a programme Coke was supporting with Mexico’s sports commission. He didn’t mention the soda tax.

The tax took effect on 1 January 2014. A year and a half later, all sides were engaged in another battle. The industry desperately needed to show that the tax had failed. “This is a regressive tax,” said Jorge Terrazas, the new head of the beverage industry association. “It’s not just that 64% [of tax revenue] comes from people with few resources. They didn’t stop drinking soda. But they stopped buying personal hygiene and home items.”

Terrazas was talking about data that had just come out from the National Survey of Household Income and Expenditure. Drinks, in fact, were the only category of spending that rose between 2012 and 2014. The industry seized on this data – but the survey is not a measure of soda sales. It can’t separate the effects of the tax from background noise, such as economic changes. And “drinks” includes all cold beverages, including alcoholic drinks. Mexicans could be buying more bottled water, or drowning their sorrows in beer.

Industry executives felt their strongest argument was the high level of tax collected. Treasury officials had predicted the government would collect 1.2bn pesos from the soda tax in 2014. It actually collected 1.9bn. “That is the best argument that the tax did not do what it was supposed to do,“ Zabludovsky said – arguing that the high rate of revenue suggested consumption had not decreased. “The more successful it is as tax collection, the less successful it is as a health measure.”

That’s not how the finance ministry sees it. Rodrigo Barros, the ministry’s head of tax policy, said that the initial revenue prediction for the tax had been very conservative it was a projection based on existing VAT collection on soda, which is taxed at numerous points. The new tax is collected only from factories and importers. “These are only a few large plants, and it makes collection much easier,” he said. “Tax evasion rates are lower.” The high level of tax collected could reflect lower rates of tax evasion, he said.

For Calvillo’s side as well, the question of whether the tax succeeded was all-important. Bloomberg funded research conducted by Rivera at the National Institute of Public Health along with Barry Popkin, a prominent nutritionist at the University of North Carolina. The study controlled for other factors affecting soda purchases, and found that compared with pre-tax trends, sales of taxed drinks fell by 6% in 2014. Sales of bottled water were up by 4%.

The decline started slowly but accelerated: by December 2014, soda sales were down 12% from December 2013. And the drop was greatest among the poorest Mexicans – by December they were buying 17% less sweetened soda than the year before. (Terrazas was right – the tax does affect the poor disproportionately. But so does diabetes.) In September, Mexico’s national statistics institute released data on beverage consumption showing that Rivera’s findings actually slightly understated the soda tax’s success.


World health officials want super-size tax on soda and sugary drinks, but are countries ready to swallow that?

The World Health Organization is backing a controversial remedy to reverse the global rise in obesity and type 2 diabetes — a 20% to 50% soda tax.

The recommended tax should not be limited to soda, the WHO said Tuesday. It should apply to all sugar-sweetened beverages, a category that includes sports drinks, energy drinks, fruit punch, sweetened iced tea, vitamin waters and lemonade.

“If governments tax products like sugary drinks, they can reduce suffering and save lives,” Dr. Douglas Bettcher, director of the WHO’s Department for the Prevention of Noncommunicable Diseases, said in a statement.

The World Health Organization, the public health agency of the United Nations, said the reasons to act were clear. More than half a billion of the world’s adults are now obese, including 11% of men and 15% of women. Those rates are more than double what they were in 1980. In the United States, 34% of men and 38% of women are obese, which is defined as having a body mass index of 30 or above.

People who are obese have an increased risk of heart disease, the leading cause of death in the U.S. They also are more likely to develop certain types of cancer, including breast cancer, colorectal cancer, renal cell cancer, esophageal adenocarcinoma, endometrial cancer, gallbladder cancer and thyroid cancer. The risk of stroke and type 2 diabetes also rises with BMI.

The WHO cited the steady rise of diabetes as a primary reason for a sugary drink tax. Worldwide, an estimated 442 million people live with the chronic disease, which caused 1.5 million deaths in 2012. More than 76,488 Americans died of diabetes in 2014.

In a report released Tuesday, WHO officials say that consumption of added sugar is the root of these ills. This includes not just table sugar but the honey, syrups and fruit juice concentrates that find their way into processed foods.

“Nutritionally, people don’t need any sugar in their diet,” Dr. Francesco Branca, director of the WHO’s Department of Nutrition for Health and Development, said in the statement.

With this in mind, global health officials have been calling on people to limit the amount of added sugar in their diet to less than 10% of total calories. Even better would be to keep it below 5% of total calories. For an adult with a healthy weight, that works out to about six teaspoons of sugar per day. (To keep that in perspective, a 12-ounce can of Coca-Cola contains the equivalent of nearly 10 teaspoons of sugar.)

A soda tax would help people meet this goal, the WHO argued in a 36-page report. When sugary drinks are more expensive, people will buy less of them. That means they’ll consume less, too.

Economic research suggests that a tax would have to raise the price of sugar-sweetened beverages by 20% to 50% in order to make most people unwilling to buy them, according to the report. In coming to this conclusion, the authors reviewed studies of food and drink taxes implemented in Denmark, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, France, Hungary, Mauritius, Mexico, the Philippines, Thailand and the United States.

“The greatest impact was on lower-income, less-educated younger populations and populations at greatest risk of obesity,” the authors wrote.

The most effective taxes are likely to be excise taxes, which are levied on a specific amount of a certain product or ingredient. This would eliminate the incentive for manufacturers to simply switch to less expensive sweeteners in order to shield consumers from higher prices, according to the report.

The report also recommended the use of subsidies that would reduce the price of fresh fruits and vegetables by 10% to 30% to encourage people to buy them.

Implementing soda taxes won’t be easy, the report authors acknowledged.

“The beverage industry will do everything it can to avoid taxes, using the same well-financed — and well recognized — scare tactics used by the tobacco industry,” they wrote. In particular, they cited the industry’s efforts to fight proposed taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages in San Francisco and Berkeley in 2014, pouring more than $10 million into their campaign and outspending tax proponents, 18-1.

Advocates for soda taxes should expect arguments related to fairness (consumption taxes are a bigger burden for poor than rich people), freedom (the government shouldn’t interfere with your personal choice of what to drink), trust (officials won’t spend the tax revenue the way they say they will) and economics (small business will be harmed if taxes discourage sales). But the report authors emphasized that this onslaught “can be overcome with a well-planned campaign involving a broad coalition of supporters … and sufficient resources.”

Consider Berkeley, where a tax on sugary drinks passed with 75% of the vote. A study this summer in the American Journal of Public Health found that five months after the penny-per-ounce tax passed, consumption of sugar-laden drinks had fallen 21% among low-income Berkeley residents. Meanwhile, consumption rose 4% in neighboring Oakland and San Francisco, where there was no such tax.

Places like Berkeley “are showing that taxes on sugary drinks are effective at driving down consumption,” said Michael Bloomberg, who tried to implement a ban on super-sized sugary drinks when he was mayor of New York and now serves as a WHO global ambassador for noncummunicable diseases.

“The World Health Organization report released today can help these effective policies spread to more places around the world, and that will help save many lives,” Bloomberg said in a statement.

The International Council of Beverages Assns., on the other hand, said soda taxes were “discriminatory” and too simplistic to address “the very real and complex challenge of obesity.”

As the authors of the WHO report predicted, the industry group argued that such taxes pose an unfair burden on poor people.

“The committee members have lost sight of the real-world implications of these type of recommendations,” the association said in a statement. “In Mexico, for example, 10,000 jobs were lost and those who could least afford it carried the burden of the tax, all for a minimal decrease of fewer than 6 calories per day out of a diet of 3000 calories.”

Follow me on Twitter @LATkarenkaplan and “like” Los Angeles Times Science & Health on Facebook.


Controlling the Carbonation

Soda-making is a relatively simple process, so when problems arise they usually fall into two categories: too fizzy or not fizzy enough. For soda that isn't fizzy enough, the easiest strategy is to leave the bottles sitting at room temperature for an additional day or two. As a last-ditch effort to save a batch that shows no signs of fizziness after a few days at room temperature, add an extra pinch of yeast.

Over-carbonated soda is a bigger problem. Keep in mind that homemade soda is almost always more carbonated than store-bought soft drinks. As long as you use plastic bottles instead of glass, over-carbonated soda isn't dangerous, but it can make quite a mess if the bottles burst. Always open soda bottles slowly, and if in doubt, open them outside. If you plan to let your soda carbonate in an especially warm room, consider reducing the amount of yeast in the recipe by half because yeast goes crazy in a warm environment.

Most importantly, always keep bottles of carbonated homemade soda in the refrigerator. Don't leave full, or nearly full bottles of soda in a warm area, and if you do, remove the bottles' caps.

After three or four weeks in the refrigerator, the soda will have lost most of its carbonation, and if you're not planning to finish the bottle, pour it out. However, disposing of home-brewed soda usually isn't a problem &mdash leftovers are rare!


Pogledajte video: UŽAS NA GROBLJU! SRBIJA OVAKO NEŠTO NE PAMTI! (Oktobar 2021).