Slashdot Mirror
Calorie Burning Coke Coming Soon
The Fun Guy writes "Coca-Cola and Nestle are getting together to introduce a new beverage "proven to burn calories". Enviga will be in the U.S. Northeast in November, nationwide in January 2007. How does it burn calories? With green tea extracts, calcium, and caffeine. No word on how many milligrams caffeine per can. "
Otherwise known as cancer
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
"Enviga increases calorie burning. It represents the perfect partnership of science and nature," said Dr. Rhona Applebaum, chief scientist, The Coca-Cola Company. "Enviga contains the optimum blend of green tea extracts (EGCG), caffeine and naturally active plant micronutrients designed to work with your body to increase calorie burning, thus creating a negative calorie effect.
Oh man this is such a lie..... Did they perform metabolic chamber analysis? Where is the published paper? Why do people *always* seem to fall for marketing nonsense like this? Look, the only way to lose weight is to burn more calories than you consume. It's calories in versus calories out and Enviga, metabolically will not let you magically burn more calories by consuming it unless it can somehow short circuit the electron transport chain or mitochondrial respiration and that is dangerous as hell. (Think poisons like dinitrophenol or proteins in brown fat like thermogenin).
It's too bad, because I like Coca Cola products, but this claim that it will burn excess or extra calories is simply a marketing lie. And yes, I *do* have a PhD in physiology and am calling out Dr. Rhona Applebaum to back up her words with some scientific evidence that shows these claims are more than specious marketingspeak designed to increase the bottom line.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
"Optimum blend of green tea extracts (EGCG)"
Nearly every single word on here is marketing buzz speak. Boo.
I don't know what University Dr. Applebaum threw money at to call herself a doctor but I certainly hope I never attend it. Call me a hardass but Applebaum just lost any respect from me that 'doctor' & 'chief scientist' could have given her.
Did anyone else notice that this sounded like a 3 am infomercial for Bowflex?
My work here is dung.
Enviga + Viagra = Senior Citizen Health Plan
So here's a picture of the cans.
On another note I can think of one beverage that is zero calories and makes you feel great. Just plain old water. I started drinking a couple liters of it a day about 2 years ago and I've never felt better. No more dehydration to make me feel sluggish and tired. That's way better than any caffiene buzz (which just exacerbates dehydration by the way). I love caffiene, but I think it's overused.
"It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
We've had calorie burning coke for a while. Apparently this new product isn't as hard on the nose.
Similes are like metaphors
It already is their greatest scam.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/gadgets/enviga-fat- burning-tea-snake-oil-scam-just-as-you-predicted-2 08488.php
Maybe if you got a few more editors there, you would have known that every other news site on the face of the internet reported AND debunked the claims over a week ago.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
Funny how, as others have mentioned, one can never get a copy of any of the supposed studies which 'prove' whatever it is the product claims. Like Kevn Trudeau and his scam or the now discredited DHEA claim, this too will be shown to be a false promise of getting something for nothing.
We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
If it is ice cold then your body must burn calories to warm it up to 98.2 F / or 36.8 C (the REAL average human body temperature - 98.6 is what you get when you round 36.8C upto 37C then convert Farenhiet).
One calorie (phyics) will raise one gram of water one degree. 454 grams = 16 ounces. So to raise 16 ounces of ice cold water from 0.8 C to 36.8 takes 36*454= 16,344 calories. But please note when talking about food, what we call a calorie is actually what a physicist calls a KILOcalorie, so we do the conversion and:
Drinking one nearly ice cold water 16 ounce bottle of water will burn about 16 calories.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Every month in wired there's an "found: artifacts from the future" picture. a few months ago it featured a soft drink product with negative calories.
Also there is a food already available that for all intents and purposes contains negative calories: Celery
All misspellings and grammatical errors in the above post are intentional and part of my artistic expression.
1. Coca Cola delivery trucks are not, to my knowledge, equipped with Tesla-coil like devices capable of illuminating light bulbs by some kind of electrical induction the moment that they drive past them - even during the Christmas holiday period.
2. Having performed an experiment with a dead goldfish and a can of Coke, I can confirm that it indeed does not, as you so like to state, "add life".
3. I just wondered how the "Teaching The World To Sing" campaign is getting on since the heady days of the 70s? I realise that this vast undertaking will take a long time to complete but could I ask that you bump Britney Spears up the list a bit?
Having said all that, I'm afraid I must ask that you prepare yourselves for something of a shock - after many years of analysis and experimentation I'm afraid I have to conclude that you product is nothing more than a fizzy drink.
Kind Regards
A. Consumer
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Diet Pepsi Slurpees have been out for about three years now. A 32-ounce drink has essentially zero calories, and since it's mostly ice, it should take about 100 calories to drink one:
900 grams of Slurpee * 80 cal/g (to melt the ice to 0 celsius) = 72000
900 grams of Slurpee * 1 cal/g/degree * 37 degrees (to raise the fluid to body heat) = 33596
total 105596 calories or 105 Kcal (the food calorie)
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
There have been many, many studies about green tea (which contains a lot of EGCG) and obesity. This data is years old too... EGCG being useful in obesity isn't even news. Magic? Not hardly. Yes, 2,4-DNP is still the king of obesity drugs, but it hasn't been legal since 1930 in humans for a reason.
There are many ways to fight obesity, upregulating the metabolism is one of them. Decreasing the effeciency of processing/storing food, which results in more calories excreted in feces, is another. (think leptin signalling, hypothalamic setpoint, PPARalpha agonists, Xenical/chitosan... oh and EGCG does this with carbs) Changing behavior underlying emotional eating (low serotonin), food compulsions (neuropeptide Y), or lack of energy/desire to exercise is another. (antidepressants, stimulants) Changing hunger/fed signalling by improving leptin sensitivity/transport, insulin sensitivity, etc makes a difference too. (omega-3 fatty acids, oh and EGCG improves insulin sensitivity...)
EGCG:
1. Inhibits fatty acid synthase
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=p ubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=164 04708&query_hl=165&itool=pubmed_DocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=p ubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=166 11078&query_hl=165&itool=pubmed_docsum
2. Upgrades hypothalamic AMPK to suppress adipogenesis and induce apoptosis of adipocytes
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=p ubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=162 36247&query_hl=165&itool=pubmed_DocSum
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=p ubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=159 76140&query_hl=165&itool=pubmed_DocSum
3. Increases fat oxidation, metabolism (likely through COMT inhibition and indirect gene expression)
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itoo l=abstractplus&db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=abstrac tplus&list_uids=10584049
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?itoo l=abstractplus&db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=abstrac tplus&list_uids=10702779
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=p ubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=157 38931&query_hl=165&itool=pubmed_DocSum
http://ww
Since nobody has these parasites nowadays, these diseases are now more common.
Tapeworms are *very* common in some areas of the world. For instance, just last week I saw the MRI of a patient with trichinosis. Parasites in the brain are a baaaad thing and not as uncommon as you might think.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I don't know about the rest of you, but my farts already smell like bakery fresh cinnamon rolls
Drinking coke is associated with lower bone density in women. So if you don't like the prosprect of brittle bones in old age (osteoporosis), you may want to drink something else.
I'm pretty sure the negative calories comes from the energy required to break it down so you can metabolize what energy it DOES contain. Squeezing all the juice out kind of defeats the purpose.
...post-graduate work?
First off, your sentence is broken because you inserted "obtained" recklessly. Secondly, your position disagrees with Snopes.
Thirdly, your use of the thermic effect of food is a bit wonky. 10% is, first off, an average estimate. Protein can cost you as much as 30%. Fat costs you very little. Secondly, TEF describes how many calories you will spend consuming the food in question. Conversely, it can be used to calculate how many calories of a given type of food one would need to recover from expenditure. What a bomb calorimeter gets from food is clearly not the same as what a human body gets from it. There are plenty of things that humans can eat that cannot sustain them calorically. Just ask Metamucil...
Fourthly (never had to go that far before), just think about it:
Even drinking cold water causes you to burn calories. Your body ends up doing the work to bring the water up to body temperature. How would digesting a highly fibrous water-stalk not take effort?
Yes, celery has a few digestible kcals per stalk, but you more than outstrip that in digestion. Will those extra burned calories make a marked difference? God no, but you're still on the wrong side of the argument. Whipping out your PhD just shows how much trouble you are having defending your position. I certainly hope I never need any of your work. To be considered right in an argument, it helps to actually be right. I don't have a PhD, but if the point of getting one is to have something to wave around when you're clearly wrong, I think I'll pass.
Parasites in the brain are a baaaad thing and not as uncommon as you might think.
Around 90% of French have been infected by Toxoplasma gondii, a nasty little parasite that infects the brain and is suspected to cause changes to the host's personality.
This explains a lot.
(Disclaimer: some facts may have been omitted to make a joke about the French)
Some people, however, have the condition phenylketonuria (PKU), an inability to convert phenylalanine into tyrosine. For them, tyrosine becomes essential in the diet, and consumption of phenylalanine becomes dangerous, because phenylalanine and its breakdown products will accumulate, which can damage the brain (hence the warning on diet soda cans).
Also of interest in the aspartame molecule is the methyl ester on the end- in the presence of heat and acid or base, the ester bond breaks to form methanol. The enzyme that begins the process of alcohol metabolism, alcohol dehydrogenase, cannot distinguish between methanol and ethanol, and so it oxidizes methanol to methanal, better known as formaldehyde. Two things to keep in mind about this process: there are other natural human metabolic processes that also produce methanol, and aspartame is 180 times sweeter than sugar, so there is not very much at all in diet soda. For some people, the health effects of aspartame are certainly real, and they should avoid it- in my personal case, though, I consider sugar to be more dangerous in the long run.
"FDA staff reviewers expressed concern about the number of patients who were left out of the study because they died."