Coca-Cola defends corn syrup after Trump claims he struck cane sugar deal
'I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so. I'd like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola,' Trump said in a social media post late Tuesday.
'This will be a very good move by them – You'll see. It's just better!'
Initially, the drinks giant responded with a neutral statement of appreciation for 'President Trump's enthusiasm' for Coke, and a vague message about 'new innovative offerings within our Coca-Cola product range' to come.
On Thursday, however, the soft drinks company released an additional statement making positive claims about high-fructose corn syrup, a product that some blame for soaring US obesity rates and which has become a target of health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr's 'Make America healthy again' movement.
'The name sounds complex, but high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) – which we use to sweeten some of our beverages – is actually just a sweetener made from corn,' Coca-Cola said in a statement. 'It's safe; it has about the same number of calories per serving as table sugar and is metabolized in a similar way by your body.'
It added that the American Medical Association 'has confirmed that HFCS is no more likely to contribute to obesity than table sugar or other full-calorie sweeteners', and said: 'Please be assured that Coca-Cola brand soft drinks do not contain any harmful substances.'
In 2023, the AMA released a statement saying it recognized 'that at the present time, insufficient evidence exists to specifically restrict use of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) or other fructose-containing sweeteners in the food supply or to require the use of warning labels on products containing HFCS'.
Trump's rather abrupt entry into the Coca-Cola sugar debate comes as he struggles to move past a growing controversy over the release of files relating to the disgraced sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, a one-time friend of Trump's.
The president's high consumption of Diet Coke is well-documented, including the installation of a red 'Diet Coke button' near his desk that he can press in order to summon a staff member with the drink.
Diet Coke contains neither corn syrup nor sugar cane, but aspartame, a low-calorie artificial sweetener.
A switch by Coca-Cola to using sugar cane could trade implications for the $285bn US soft drinks market. Coca-Cola in Mexico is made with cane sugar and packaged in glass bottles. Some is imported into the US, where it sells unofficially as 'Mexican Coke' at a premium over its domestic counterpart.
In the 1980s Coca-Cola's US arm changed its formulation to use high-fructose corn syrup, supported by US farming subsidies, and not imported sugar cane subjected to import tariffs. But turning back the clock could prove costly if Trump's high US tariffs on nations that produce sugar cane continue to apply.
Trump had previously clashed with the company over voting access in Georgia, where the company is based. But ahead of his second inauguration as president in January of this year, the company's CEO, James Quincey, presented Trump with an inaugural Diet Coke bottle.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
14 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Gun-toting migrant who called for the 'death of all Jews' is back behind bars after breaching licence conditions
A 'Hamas-supporting' illegal Channel migrant who was released early from jail is back behind bars after breaching his licence conditions, The Mail on Sunday can reveal. Palestinian Abu Wadee was sent back to prison within days of his release under Labour's scheme to ease pressure on the overcrowded prison estate. The 33-year-old was initially jailed for nine months at Canterbury Crown Court in May after he was convicted over his illegal arrival in the UK on a dinghy, which he had live-streamed on TikTok. He admitted one count of attempting to enter the UK without leave or valid entry clearance when he arrived on the crowded inflatable on March 6. Wadee was arrested by immigration enforcement officers at an asylum hotel in Manchester, three days after he arrived in the UK, after the MoS uncovered a stream of online anti-Semitic vitriol in which he called for the 'death to all Jews'. Wadee, also known as Mosab Abdulkarim Al-Gassas, is believed to be from the city of Khan Yunis in Gaza. Images on social media show him taking part in running battles with the Israel Defence Forces. He was released from prison in June after serving around three months, including time spent in custody awaiting his plea hearing. Sources confirmed Wadee was recalled to prison early last month for breaching his licence conditions. He will now serve the remainder of his nine-month sentence behind bars. It is not known what prompted his recall to jail. A 12-month jail term usually triggers automatic removal from the UK, so a court will have to decide whether to deport Wadee. But he would likely have to be sent to one of the European countries he previously passed through on his journey to the UK, rather than his homeland due to the conflict with Israel making it a warzone. He has lodged an asylum application in the UK, having previously made similar applications in Greece, Belgium and Germany before crossing the Channel. Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'This shameful episode lays bare a double Labour failure. 'Firstly, their failure to control our borders is allowing people like this hateful extremist into our country. 'And then Labour's early release scheme is allowing dangerous criminals to roam our streets and put the public at risk.' Wadee is just one of 25,000 migrants to have arrived in the UK in small boats so far this year.
The Sun
14 minutes ago
- The Sun
Major UK high street bank quits UN-backed net zero alliance as it says body ‘not fit for purpose'
A MAJOR high street bank has become the latest British lender to quit the Net Zero Banking Alliance, the bank said on Friday. Barclays argued that the departure of several global lenders has left it no longer fit to support the bank's green transition. Barclays' decision to quit the foremost banking alliance focused on tackling climate change follows on from HSBC and several major US banks. It also raises questions about the ability of the group to influence change in the sector going forward. The bank said in a statement on its website: "After consideration, we have decided to withdraw from the Net Zero Banking Alliance." It added that its commitment to be net zero by 2050 remained unchanged and that it still saw a commercial opportunity for itself and its clients in the energy transition. Earlier this week Barclays published the first update on its sustainability strategy in several years. It said the bank made £500 million in revenue from sustainable and low-carbon transition finance in 2024. Jeanne Martin, co-director of corporate engagement at responsible investment NGO ShareAction called the decision to leave the Net Zero Banking Alliance "incredibly disappointing and a step in the wrong direction at a time when the dangers of climate change are rapidly mounting." Barclays said the alliance was no longer fit for its purpose: "With the departure of most of the global banks, the organisation no longer has the membership to support our transition." The Net Zero Banking Alliance, a global initiative launched by the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative, lists more than 100 members on its website - including leading international financial institutions. A spokesperson for the alliance said it remains focused on "supporting its members to lead on climate by addressing the barriers preventing their clients from investing in the net-zero transition." It comes after it was announced that Barclays is slashing interest rates on its popular Rainy Day for the third time in less than seven months. From August 4, the interest rate for balances up to £5,000 will fall from 4.61% to 4.36%. The Rainy Day Saver account, which offers easy access to funds, has been a favourite among Barclays ' 20 million customers. It is designed for balances up to £5,000, with savers earning the higher rate on the first £5,000 – currently 4.61%. Savings above this threshold earn just 1% interest, but customers benefit from instant access to their money at any time. At the current rate, holding £5,000 in the account would earn you £230.50 in interest over 12 months. However, when the rate drops to 4.36%, this will fall to £218 - a loss of £12.50 per year. Once boasting a competitive 5.12% interest rate earlier this year, Barclays has steadily chipped away at its appeal. In February, the rate dropped to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. In February, the bank reduced the rate to 4.87%, followed by another cut in April to 4.61%. Now, just months later, rates are set to drop again, leaving savers questioning whether to stick with the account or explore better options elsewhere. How Barclay Card Changes Could Affect You ANALYSIS by Consumer Reporter, James Flanders: Barclaycard's change to its credit card repayment structure sounds great if you don't dig into the details. After all, Barclaycard says it's "making the changes to give you greater flexibility each month". In practice, it means that if you can't afford to pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period, you can repay much less under the minimum repayment option than you have done previously. If you only pay the minimum amounts on occasion, this is super useful. But if you rely on this type of repayment plan in the long term, it could will cost you hundreds of pounds extra in interest. It could also negatively affect your credit file as it'll take you much longer to clear your debt. More interest will be applied to your outstanding balance, too, as less is paid down each month. For example, if you have a balance of £5,000 on a Barclaycard at 24% interest, where you only make the minimum payments and don't spend on the card. Under the old "2.5% of the balance plus the interest charged" rule, it would take around 14 years to clear the balance. In total, you'd expect to pay about £3,500 in interest. But with the new "1% of the balance plus the interest charged" calculation, it will take over 30 years to clear the same balance. You'd then end up paying a whopping £8,500 in interest. Before taking out a new credit card or increasing the amount you borrow, it's vital to consider the consequences. You should only borrow money if you can afford to pay it back. It's always vital to ask yourself if you actually need to borrow before committing to a new credit card, personal loan or overdraft. If you use a credit card, I'd recommend that you always pay off your balance in full at the end of each statement period. Lenders have a responsibility to help customers who are in debt. If you're in a debt crisis, your first point of call should be your lender. They might help you out by offering you a reduced interest rate or a temporary payment holiday - so check in with your lender if you're struggling.
Reuters
14 minutes ago
- Reuters
Federal agency opens probe into former Trump prosecutor Jack Smith
Aug 2 (Reuters) - A U.S. federal agency has opened a formal investigation into former Special Counsel Jack Smith, who oversaw two criminal probes into President Donald Trump following his first term in the White House. The Office of Special Counsel confirmed to Reuters that it was investigating whether Smith violated the Hatch Act, a law prohibiting federal employees from using their position for political activity. The decision follows a request for a probe by U.S. Senator Tom Cotton, an Arkansas Republican. The OSC is an independent agency that probes the conduct of federal employees, but it does not have the authority to bring criminal charges. It is different from the type of Special Counsel's office previously overseen by Smith, who was appointed by the Department of Justice to pursue criminal cases. The OSC's investigation, which was first reported by the New York Post, is the latest in a series of actions taken by Trump and his allies against their perceived political enemies. Smith, who resigned from his post in January following Trump's election victory, could not immediately be reached for comment. Earlier this week Cotton accused Smith of aggressively pursuing his cases against Trump with the aim of hurting his presidential campaign, calling Smith "a political actor masquerading as a public official" in a series of posts on X. "That's why I've asked this unprecedented interference in the 2024 election be immediately investigated by OSC," Cotton wrote on X. A former war crimes prosecutor, Smith brought two criminal cases against Trump: one accusing him of illegally retaining classified material and another related to Trump's attempts to overturn his 2020 election loss, an effort that sparked the January 6, 2021, assault, opens new tab on the U.S. Capitol. Neither case went to trial, having been delayed and buffeted by a series of legal challenges, including a ruling by the Supreme Court's conservative majority that granted former presidents broad immunity from criminal prosecution. Smith dropped both cases after Trump won the election, citing a longstanding Justice Department policy against prosecuting a sitting president, but issued a report in January saying the evidence he gathered would have been enough to convict Trump at trial. Trump denied wrongdoing and assailed the prosecutions as politically motivated attempts to damage his campaign.
