The Lessons of Prohibition - Round Three

Don · Sep 15, 2014

Alcohol prohibition didn't work. It created a whole group of people willing to risk punishment to make an inordinate profit. That risk was increased by an increase in violence on both sides that lead to a war in the streets and the eventual lifting of that prohibition.

Drug prohibition isn't working. It created a whole group of people willing to risk punishment to make an inordinate profit. That risk was increased by an increase in violence on both sides that lead to a war in the streets and we are seeing the lifting of those prohibitions today.

Round three: Student Suspended for Selling Illicit Full-Sugar Pepsi Out of His Locker

Alberta high school student Keenan Shaw was suspended for two days after he got caught selling an illicit substance from his locker at Winston Churchill his school. Weed? Nope. Booze? Nope. Acid? Nope.

Shaw says all those treats (and more) are on offer in the school's corridors:

"I'm not going to name any names, but I know a couple of people selling marijuana, there's kids selling smokes, there was a kid last year selling meth, as well as a kid selling acid," said Shaw.

But his drug of choice is full-sugar Pepsi. Commerce in the sweet, sweet drink is banned at his school, which allows only diet sodas to be sold on premises.

He bought a 12-pack for $5, scored $12 in a matter of minutes, and another drug czar-in-the-making was created. He says he'll stop, but he's just the first, I'm betting, and those who follow will keep a lower profile. There's a market to be served and a profit to be made, and somebody will make it.

I don't think violence will be the way this plays out. I think it will play out with consumers of education looking for other ways to find the product they're supposed to be getting instead of the product they're being served... and I'm not talking about Pepsi, but education as opposed to whateverthehell the schools are delivering these days.

c.e.lawson · Sep 15, 2014

This is slightly off topic, but diet sodas are terrible for you, too, including raising risk of some of the same health issues as sugared sodas. So not only is this rule silly, it also seems arbitrary.

blacbird · Sep 16, 2014

Soooo . . . this happened in . . . CANADA?

Somehow or other Obama's to blame. Wait for it.

caw

Rufus Coppertop · Sep 16, 2014

Down with Obama! It's all his fault.

Don · Sep 16, 2014

Obama's fault? How's that?

Since it's apparently a faux pas to post a thread about an event in CANADA, let's look at the US, shall we?

Alcohol prohibition was one of those rare instances of bipartisanship, when rural protestants and social progressives from both parties teamed up to tell other people how to live, because they both thought they knew better than the man in the street how he should spend his money.

As for the Drug War, it's all Harry J. Anslinger's fault, appointed by Hoover(R) to head the U.S. Treasury Department's Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which he created. Then the two presidents that doubled down on the war on drugs were Richard Nixon(R) and Ronald Reagan(R).

But if people want to blame prohibition on Obama based on some twisted partisan logic, well, that's the way politics goes, right?

kuwisdelu · Sep 16, 2014

Why didn't the other kids just bring their own soda from home?

Rufus Coppertop · Sep 16, 2014

Don said:
Obama's fault? How's that?

I don't know. :Shrug:

I was just fulfilling Blacbird's prediction.

Cathy C · Sep 16, 2014

Um...wow. Just wow. <shakes head at stupidity of it>

J.S.F. · Sep 16, 2014

I'm gonna blame Don for posting this upsetting topic in the first place. Before this, I was leading an idyllic life and everything was sunshine and unicorns and rainbows. Now, full-sugar Pepsi is out. What's next? Coke? (The drinkable kind, not the inhalable stuff). The horror!

I blame Don. And blacbird while I'm at it. And Obama, so there. :tongue

And on a semi-serious note, this whole incident is so stupid, it's a sure sign that the Apocalypse must somehow be at hand. Or edumakators. Or something.

Devil Ledbetter · Sep 16, 2014

I see these Pepsi dealings as indicating a precocious business sense. Most of the drug dealers at my high school went on to become successful entrepreneurs. Somebody give that whiz kid a sales job.

Amadan · Sep 16, 2014

c.e.lawson said:
This is slightly off topic, but diet sodas are terrible for you, too, including raising risk of some of the same health issues as sugared sodas.

Continuing slightly-off-topic derail: uh, say what? I've never seen any of these alleged health risks substantiated.

Toothpaste · Sep 16, 2014

Amadan - someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think the crux of the argument is that the stuff in diet soda isn't that good for you in general (just like the stuff in regular soda isn't either), but drinking a can of diet coke once in a while isn't going to harm you and yes there might be an advantage to drinking diet in that way to avoid the ridiculous amount of sugar in normal soda. The problem is people think that the diet stuff has nothing bad at all in it, is this magical elixir that allows people to have their soda and drink it too, so they consume TONS of the stuff. And THAT is terribly unhealthy.

Amadan · Sep 16, 2014

Toothpaste said:
Amadan - someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think the crux of the argument is that the stuff in diet soda isn't that good for you in general (just like the stuff in regular soda isn't either), but drinking a can of diet coke once in a while isn't going to harm you and yes there might be an advantage to drinking diet in that way to avoid the ridiculous amount of sugar in normal soda. The problem is people think that the diet stuff has nothing bad at all in it, is this magical elixir that allows people to have their soda and drink it too, so they consume TONS of the stuff. And THAT is terribly unhealthy.

From the studies I've seen, you'd have to consume pretty nearly literally tons of the stuff to get cancer and all the other ailments claimed.

I'm not saying it's good for you, but it's essentially just carbonated water.

heza · Sep 16, 2014

Amadan said:
From the studies I've seen, you'd have to consume pretty nearly literally tons of the stuff to get cancer and all the other ailments claimed.

I'm not saying it's good for you, but it's essentially just carbonated water.

There's also the idea that it contributes to obesity because someone who drinks diet colas might feel justified in eating more calories from other sources. Like when I take a short walk and somehow think that's going to make up for a pan of brownies. So not the drink itself but the lifestyle it encourages in some people.

raburrell · Sep 16, 2014

Artificial sugars are thought to trick your body into an insulin response, causing it to store fat. There are tons of studies out there (some more reliable or weighty than others) showing the risks. As with anything, establishing causality is tricky.

That said, the stuff is poison in my book...

c.e.lawson · Sep 16, 2014

Amadan is correct in that most of the studies that link health risks to diet soda intake are observational, and so can't actually prove a direct cause. Keep in mind that some of the studies that refute the health concerns are funded by beverage companies, so those must be examined very carefully (as should all studies). But the main medical advice I see from scholarly organizations is to use caution and moderation when consuming diet sodas, that randomized controlled studies are desired, and that drinking water is likely best for your health. I admit I let my own bias come through and probably made too strong a comment. Still, I have concerns about the sweetness of diet sodas, the effect on calcium metabolism (losing calcium from bones), the associations (maybe causal, maybe not) with metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular events, and various other issues (the well-known GI side effects of artificial sweeteners are enough that GI docs recommend avoiding these if you have GI problems like IBS).

I've got my kids drinking La Croix - it's very satisfying to break open a can - just like a cold soda!, and it's thirst quenching and delicious straight out of the refrigerator. They don't miss soda. (Still have them on special occasions, though.)

Amadan · Sep 16, 2014

Most of the complaints I've seen about diet soda are about how it might change one's behavior in other ways - e.g., overeating other foods because you think you're "saving calories" with the diet soda, or failing to drink water and other beverages also. Which may be, but it doesn't make diet soda in itself unhealthy. The theories about causing an insulin response seem very dodgy to me, considering you can actually measure insulin.

raburrell · Sep 16, 2014

Why would the ability to measure insulin make the study dodgy? Not sure I follow.

Here are the results & conclusions of one study that did just that:

RESULTS Glucose excursions were similar after ingestion of carbonated water and diet soda. Serum insulin levels tended to be higher after diet soda, without statistical significance. GLP-1 peak and area under the curve (AUC) were significantly higher with diet soda (AUC 24.0 ± 15.2 pmol/l per 180 min) versus carbonated water (AUC 16.2 ± 9.0 pmol/l per 180 min; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS Artificial sweeteners synergize with glucose to enhance GLP-1 release in humans. This increase in GLP-1 secretion may be mediated via stimulation of sweet-taste receptors on L-cells by artificial sweetener.

Consumption of sodas containing artificial sweeteners is common practice in both children and adults. It is generally assumed that glucose metabolism is not altered because these sodas contain no or extremely few calories from carbohydrate. However, recent data obtained from animal studies demonstrate that artificial sweeteners play an active metabolic role within the gastrointestinal tract. Sweet-taste receptors, including the T1R family and α-gustducin, respond not only to caloric sugars such as sucrose but also to artificial sweeteners, including sucralose (Splenda) and acesulfame-K (1,2). In both humans and animals, these receptors have been shown to be present in glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1–secreting L-cells of the gut mucosa as well as in lingual taste buds (3–5) and serve as critical mediators of GLP-1 secretion (5). In this study, we examined the effect of artificial sweeteners in a commercially available soft drink on glucose, insulin, and GLP-1 in humans.

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/32/12/2184.full

Amadan · Sep 16, 2014

raburrell said:
Why would the ability to measure insulin make the study dodgy? Not sure I follow.

Here are the results & conclusions of one study that did just that:

Thanks. That study confirms what I said - no evidence of an insulin response (well, technically, no statistically significant evidence), and some speculation that diet soda "might" affect the metabolism in some unspecified way.

raburrell · Sep 16, 2014

Amadan said:
Thanks. That study confirms what I said - no evidence of an insulin response (well, technically, no statistically significant evidence), and some speculation that diet soda "might" affect the metabolism in some unspecified way.

The first part isn't correct - the area under the curve of glucagon was higher to a significant level. The insulin was higher as well, but not to the required level of significance.

While their proposed mechanism is just that, a proposal, they're specific about what receptors they believe are being activated, which have been shown to exist in the gut.

Amadan · Sep 16, 2014

raburrell said:
The first part isn't correct - the area under the curve of glucagon was higher to a significant level. The insulin was higher as well, but not to the required level of significance.

The GLP-1 was higher, not the insulin. I read the paper, and while this is not my field, it appears that they don't really know what the significance of increased GLP-1 might be.

raburrell · Sep 16, 2014

It's a cleavage product of proglucagon.
I work in diabetes research.

eta: if you'd like some specifics about GLP-1, here's the wikipedia info on it:
The known physiological functions of GLP-1 include:

increases insulin secretion from the pancreas in a glucose-dependent manner.
decreases glucagon secretion from the pancreas by engagement of a specific G protein-coupled receptor.
increases insulin-sensitivity in both alpha cells and beta cells
increases beta cells mass and insulin gene expression, post-translational processing and incretion.
inhibits acid secretion and gastric emptying in the stomach.
decreases food intake by increasing satiety in brain.
promotes insulin sensitivity.

Amadan · Sep 16, 2014

raburrell said:
It's a cleavage product of proglucagon.
I work in diabetes research.

Okay. This does not explain how my interpretation of the paper is incorrect, since the language seems pretty straightforward, but perhaps that should be a thread about the Health Risks of Diet Soda.

raburrell · Sep 16, 2014

You indicated there's no indication of an insulin response, but the paper indicates there is likely response further in the precursor/product chain. While it's something that needs a lot more study, it certainly has hallmarks of 'it's not nice to fuck with mother nature'

kuwisdelu · Sep 16, 2014

So should I drink diet soda or regular soda?

I don't keep either in the apartment, so I only indulge infrequently.

The Lessons of Prohibition - Round Three

Don

All Living is Local

c.e.lawson

blacbird

Rufus Coppertop

Don

All Living is Local

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World

Rufus Coppertop

Cathy C

Ooo! Shiny new cover!

J.S.F.

Red fish, blue fish...

Devil Ledbetter

Come on you stranger, you legend,

Amadan

Toothpaste

THE RECKLESS RESCUE is out now!

Amadan

heza

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

c.e.lawson

Amadan

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Amadan

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Amadan

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

Amadan

raburrell

Treguna Makoidees Trecorum SadisDee

kuwisdelu

Revolutionize the World