Slashdot Mirror
Science Fair Project Exposes GlaxoSmithKline Lies
shadowspar writes "Despite claims made by GlaxoSmithKline that their Ribena soft drinks are high in Vitamin C, two New Zealand high school students found in their science fair research project that at least some formulations of the drink contained no detectable levels of the vitamin. As a result, GSK has been fined over $200,000 by the NZ Commerce Commission and ordered to run newspaper ads admitting that some of their drinks contain no Vitamin C."
To think companies will put out products that we consume into
our bodies that do not contain the ingredients listed on the
can. Not quite the pet food disaster that happened to animals,
but it is getting closer.
Like i tell others, until babies die from baby food, no one
will string the company owners up to the nearest tree.
I'm shocked!
"Slashdot. News for Nerds (two weeks after AP runs it and it appears on Yahoo's front page). Stuff that mattered."
Pwned :)
GSK Executives outsmarted by 14 year olds :)
http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
It's nice sometimes when the stream of stories about how multinationals are reaming us is interrupted with one flavoured by just desserts.
Also, the comeuppance is doubly sweet when it's underdogs. And who's more of an underdog than an intelligent high school student with an avid interest in science?
In the movie version, there would be a B-plot about the nerds winning the hearts of two pretty girls through the process. Maybe the girls are interns at GSK. I don't know. Hire Charlie Kauffman.
These stories are free but worth money.
"and ordered to run newspaper ads admitting that some of their drinks contain no Vitamin C" This is far more damaging to them than a 200k fine. Its like virtually stick them in the stocks and publically embarassing them. I wish more laws resulted in this for companies rather than simple fines.
http://www.rense.com/general79/wdx1.htm
Yes, I see now that they're girls. I missed that. My Fark-brain filtered it out as some advert for a calendar girls site.
These stories are free but worth money.
I would've gotten away with it if it hadn't been for those meddling kids.
I heard an interview with one of the girls. When they first tried to contact the company, they were stonewalled so they started contacting other people and the next thing they knew was they were on the international news.
For a company to ignore even fourteen year olds and hope they will just go away is really dumb. Better to deal with the problem before it gets big.
Anyway, what I understood the company to have said was something like: "The berries that this product is made from have more vitamin C than orange juice." The problem being, of course, that none of the vitamin C made it into the product.
There's this new drink called Orange Juice that claims to have even more Vitamin C. Scientists call it a break through in food science. There was a point were food scientist stopped producing useful foods like orange juice, peanut butter, and cornflakes, and started making consumers feel better about eating crap. I think it occurred about when the US became the fattest nation on Earth. PS. I like to think of Coke Zero as a tastier Diet Coke rather than a healthier Coke Classic. None of them are good for you, but two have fewer calories.
They've been selling Ribena for decades under the advertising that it was high in vitamin C. Hell, my grandma used to tell us to drink it. So unless this is a new zealand local recipe thats at fault, i'm sorry, but an inconsequential fine and an apology in a newspaper in a country of 4.1m people really isn't enough - they've been deceiving the purchasing public in several countries for a long time.
Rumours also abound over the amount of cocaine in 'coke'. There may be no mountains or dew in Mountain Dew and no pepper in Dr Pepper. The manufacturers of the French beverage Pschitt were unavailable for comment.
PS: Visit the Pschitt site - the intro's a riot!
AT&ROFLMAO
Does anyone remember the episode of Seinfeld were the low fat yogurt wasn't low fat at all and the characters kept gaining weight. I say we put the Soup Nazi in charge of the FDA. He'd clean things up.
Ascorbic acid costs literally pennies; you can pick up a pound of the stuff retail at less than 15 dollars, and we're talking 7 milligrams in each bottle. What the heck were they thinking?
I can assure you, the best way to get rid of dragons is to have one of your own.
free glaxo kline samples!
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Sugar does not cause diabetes:
i abetes
http://www.google.com/search?q=does+sugar+cause+d
You could say that sugar causes diabetes in the same way that cigarette lighters cause lung cancer.
of these kids and we need to really need to get our sorry asses in gear and stress more sciences in school. We really will be saved by our youth.
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
Ever notice how peoples teeth in so called 3rd world / developing countries are better than the west.
HA! I don't think you've ever been in a 3rd world country! Some people in less prosperous counties have very good genetics but their tooth quality fades VERY quickly due to lack of fluoride supplementation and lack of funds for quality dental care as well as lack of good dentists. Organic food is GOOD for you and it probably will keep you healthier in the long run but don't confuse this with good dental hygiene and tooth quality.
1. Make a product. 2. Lie to consumers by making false claims. 3. Make millions/billions in revenue and profits. 4. Executives laugh at the fine imposed and gladly pay $200,000 fine. 5. Pull product off shelves. 6. Profit! 7. Goto line 1 next quarter!
I wouldn't count TOO much on nature; human's natural lifespan seems to be "long enough to reproduce and raise children", with a high infant mortality rate (and a correspondingly high pregnancy rate too). Civilization is good for some things....
Still excess sugar leads to obesity which, in genetically susceptible people, can trigger glucose intolerance (glucose remains high on the blood for a long time after eating) or Type II Diabetes.
It's not trolling to point out that this was news at least 10 days ago. The Age in Melbourne last updated their story on May 21, though Google indexed it there on the 20th.
Mod parent +2 Apology.
For those who read the article,
The students *didn't* take their findings to the press. They turned their findings into the Commerce Commission who launched an investigation.
It's Ascorbic Acid. Litmus paper would readily indicate it's presence. If they found the drink to be neutral pH, then someone with better equipment can actually verify the amount in the drink. Pretty simple.
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
aspartame's real and clear dangers to your health are exactly what? About 10% of ingested aspartame (by weight) is converted to methanol, which turns into formaldehyde. Our bodies can handle small quantities of formaldehyde, but it's definitely not good for us.
About 40% of it is converted to aspartic acid. Aspartic acid is tolerated at low levels, but if it spikes to high levels (as it does when aspartame is consumed and absorbed quickly, as in a beverage) it is an excitotoxin, potentially causing nerve and brain cell damage.
Relation to cancers of various sorts are implied by some, but are largely unproven. Studies on humans show no cancer increase, but because aspartame is hardly a quarter century old, there does not exist a human population over age 40 (the age range where they look for cancer correlations) that has had a life-long exposure to it. Studies with rats show increase in some cancers in correlation with aspartame ingestion starting at a young age. It'll be about 2020 before a meaningful study of lifelong aspartame consumption and cancer can be made.
Basically, what it comes down to is that aspartame does turn into harmful substances in the body, but that the effect is probably entirely dependent on the individual's health and the quantity consumed.
Sugar is just sugar. Like any other nutrient, overindulgence causes problems. Personally, I'll stick with sugar and monitor my consumption, rather than lavishly indulging my sweet tooth with a mildly toxic artificial sweetener that may or may not be too much for my liver and brain to handle.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I'm afraid i don't find your earlier comment very "insightful", particularly in view of this latest addition. It seems that what you're actually saying is that you can feel better about your sedentary lifestyle if you drink aspartame based drinks rather than sugar based ones. And possibly improve your risk factors slightly too. But thats about as insightful as suggesting that walking down the middle of a freeway "with the flow of traffic" is safer than going "against the flow of traffic". Its true, but it wilfully ignores the real risk.
Oh, and this thread is not about marathon runners. Nor even about health freaks. Its about the benefits of a sensible lifestyle. And how in the context of such a lifestyle the choice "sugar or aspartame?" is about as important as "red tie or green tie?".
The quality of moderation has been on the decline as of late. Like the guy above who pointed this out, he was modded "Offtopic." When an article is posted,
commenting about the article is on-topic EVEN when it's not commentary that you personally like. Anyone should be able to figure this out. It is so obvious I can't believe it has to be explained to anyone with mod points.
Mods also need to figure out that anyone who vehemently disagrees is not "Flamebait" unless their primary purpose is to insult. But if they are using something resembling facts and logic, even if they're not G-rated nice, it's not flamebait.
For this reason I am almost harsh when meta-moderating, which I do anytime the opportunity comes up. I am tired of this shit; shitty moderation is how you ruin a site like this and because it doesn't happen all at once and in-your-face but happens gradually over time, people don't see it this way.
I fully expect to be modded Offtopic or Troll or Flamebait for "daring" to (again) call bullshit when I see it. My Karma is sitting at "Excellent" so do your worst and prove me right.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Yes, I am totally smarter than nature. Nature wants me to sleep in the rain and be eaten by wild coyotes. By living in a house where the coyotes can't get me, I have effectively outsmarted nature. SMRT.
Ascorbic acid is not stable in solution. (particularly with other solutes present as in soft drinks or juices, carbonation in particular will be a problem). The majority of orange and apple juice distributors spike extra ascorbic acid into their juices to account for this in order to provide a significant percentage of the recommended daily intake (RDI) in a single serving.
So the question is, how long were these kids Ribena samples on the shelf before they purchased them? They might very well have had the advertised level of vitamin C when the left the plant. Note that the advertised ascorbic acid content is relatively low; 70 ppm. I can almost guarantee that levels this low will not survive more than a few months on the shelf, particularly in a carbonated solution. This could be the fault of the retailer or distributor, not the manufacturer.
The other salient questions are: What was their sample size? Did they test only one bottle of each flavour? What analytical method did they use? Were the samples protected from elevated temperatures? The standard iodometric titration for ascorbic acid is not so easy, usually classes of second year university analytical chemistry students only have about a 60% success rate in the determination of ascorbic acid in solution, at levels considerably higher than 70 ppm.
I doubt this story a great deal, it may be true, but too many questions are unanswered. I certainly hope that the regulatory agencies concerned performed their own study with a proper sample size and experienced analysts. Even professional and certified laboratories can be unreliable in their results, let alone a pair of high school students. I have participated in enough round-robin certifications, and developed enough FDA approved methods to know.
IF, they are indeed correct, these girls have a future in analytical chemistry, not law.
FTFAs
(article 1)
"They found Ribena did not contain the advertised level of vitamin C. GlaxoSmithKline didn't reply when the students approached the firm with their findings, so they took their results to a TV show.
Then the commerce commission got involved, leading GlaxoSmithKline to plead guilty to 15 advertising-related charges on Tuesday."
(article 2)
"After attempts to contact Ribena resulted in a brush-off, the duo went to Fair Go. As well as filming the story, the organisation told the girls to contact the Commerce Commission, which they did."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Go/
They took it to a 'investigative journalism' TV show first (aka 'The Press' - their motto is "If you've been ripped off, short-changed or given the runaround and nobody wants to know...we do!"), and then the TV people suggested that they take it to the CC.
Dont be a hater =)
Orange Juice is also interesting since it contains Benzene, a known carcinogen. The longer you keep orange juice, the more benzene is formed. So orange juice is not completely beneficial.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
think of aspartame as methadone for the heroin that is sugar, and accept that some humpty dumpties need it, and all of the evils of aspartame you describe is still less evil than continuing to consume sugar
Oh, so now you're changing the debate from "aspartame is harmless" to "aspartame is better than nothing for those that can't control their cravings". Well, that's not true either. It's not a binary choice. Take, for example, stevia. Totally natural, non-carbohydrate sweetener. Currently it's not permitted to be used or sold in the US as anything but a "dietary supplement". Why? It's not patentable. The artificial sweetener industry leaned on the FDA to keep it from killing their cash cow, patented, chem lab monstrosities.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Dunbal>>> "There is no medical evidence that it helps prevent or cure colds, etc."
t =get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020168; also http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/ DSH/colds.html is a slightly less positive review that still agrees that duration can be reduced by supplementing ascorbic acid intake.
... cure colds" to me.
The BBC reported a year or more ago that the latest research suggests that supplements can reduce the duration of a cold once you've got it but don't do anything for prevention - my current use of Vit.C follows this, I take on orange juice and citrus fruit when I have a cold and occassionally even have tablets.
Member of the Finnish DOH and an epidemiology expert >>>"Duration of cold episodes that occurred during prophylaxis was significantly reduced in both children and adults. For children this represented an average reduction of 14% in symptom days, while in adults the reduction was 8%."
See http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?reques
That all sounds like it "helps
http://paknet.pakuranga.school.nz/pages.asp?MenuID =1&DeptID=51&PageID=5430
Calm down there buddy. The point of my post was not to paint you as one of the mindless consumers that grabs the box with the shiniest colors. The fact that you actively post on a website like this seperates you from the pack. Sheep typically don't make the effort.
I should have been more precise. My problem is with the mindless masses accepting without examination that Coke Zero is superior in terms of health benefit to regular Coke. Without delving into the Aspertame v. Sugar debate again, the overarching issue was of more importance to me.
And, while I did read your post (twice), I am not a hysterical nitwit, though your approbation does not concern me. I am, however, genuinely disgusted my the degree to which people are now affected by groupthink, and the related suceptibility to advertising. If we see it, we believe it. Perhaps not you, perhaps not me, but collectively, we as a nation.
I think describing my post as a diatribe is a little harsh. Keep in mind that posts aren't usually aimed at the parent, but at the issue.
Vitamin C is destroyed when it is exposed to air. When fruit is turned into juice it is always exposed to air. Most fruit juices you buy from the supermarket that do have vitamin c, it is usually added to the juice just prior to bottling. So it is not entirely unexpected Ribena has little vitamin c content. However that does not make it right to mislead consumers. The Commerce Commission fined GlaxoSmithKline only $200k, basically to cover court costs etc, but let the consumers decide the real fine to GlaxoSmithKline by making them take out the advertisements. So it is up to you who are reading this to determine if you are going to fine GlaxoSmithKline by not purchasing their product. More alarming to me is that small bottles of sparkling Ribena contain very little if any vitamin C, but they do contain 11 teaspoons of sugar, which is 40% more than a bottle of Coke. This is what we all feed our children! Not any more.
They could have augmented the juice with Vitamin C for basically nothing. I'm really surprised they've let the brand name be destroyed to save a few pennies.
Sounds like a bureaucracy at it's finest.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
A little surprised to see this appear under Cowboy Neal's byline on 31/3 as I submitted the story on the 27/3. But I gather we're both behind the times so I guess no harm done...
In fact, from your own link : "... he was surprised to hear that fructose and HFCS had become common sweeteners in the United States. He said they were virtually unheard of in England
What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?