
Why 100% fruit juice should come with a sugar warning label
Juices can pack as much, or more, sugar than some sodas or energy drinks and nutritional experts say, when people consume too much of them, there isn't really a healthier option between these sugary drinks.
Over one in ten children in South Africa under five are already overweight, and researchers have found that drinking just one sugar-sweetened beverage (e.g. sodas or fruit juice with artificially added sugar) a day raises the chances of a child being overweight by more than half.
We compared different fruit juices, energy drinks, sodas and flavoured waters to work out which drinks have the most sugar and which will — or won't — need a warning label.
Apples, oranges and grapes are healthy fruits. But when they are turned into juice they pack as much, or more, sugar than some sodas or energy drinks.
Under South Africa's proposed food labelling regulations 100% fruit juices won't be required to show a high sugar warning on their packaging because their sugars are 'naturally occurring'.
But because of their sugar content, nutritional experts say, when people consume too much of them, there isn't really a healthier option between soda, flavoured water or energy drinks.
'Coke has too much sugar, but fruit juices also have too much natural sugar,' says Edzani Mphaphuli, executive director of Grow Great, a non-profit which works to shape childhood nutrition policies.
Sugar is helping drive South Africa's obesity rise. Over one in ten children under five are already overweight, and researchers have found that drinking just one sugar-sweetened beverage a day raises the chances of a child being overweight by more than half.
That's part of what our proposed food labelling regulations are meant to combat.
READ | Sweet saboteurs: How to spot hidden sugars in these everyday snacks and cut your intake
Under the current draft — which the health department is still reviewing, according to spokesperson Foster Mohale — fruit juices will fall through a definition loophole.
But that's not what researchers who gave input on the rules recommended, or what many public health experts advise.
'Our evaluation used the criteria of 'free sugars', where all 100% fruit juices would have carried a warning label,' says Tamryn Frank, a researcher at the University of the Western Cape and who was part of the technical team.
'That highlights the importance of reconsidering the best term to include when the final regulation is published.'
The World Health Organisation (WHO) says 'free sugars' are sugars added to products like sodas and energy drinks, as well as those naturally found in fruits. But our current draft proposal says only products with 'added sugar' will be required to carry a label.
Supplied/Bhekisisa
The draft regulations say any drink with more than 5g of sugar (just over one teaspoon) per 100ml, or any amount of artificial sweetener (such as the calorie-free chemicals aspartame or sucralose) must show a black and white triangle with the word 'warning' in bold capital letters.
If passed in their current form, researchers say almost six in ten of all sodas, energy drinks and juices sold at supermarkets in the country would carry a warning label.
But while 94% of soft drinks and 97% of energy drinks would need warning labels for high sugar or artificial sweeteners, just 30% of juices would be labelled.
Pure 100% fruit juices won't carry a warning label because their sugar is natural. But not all juices are completely natural, some contain added sugar or sweeteners — so those with more than just over a teaspoon of sugar per 100ml will still need to carry a 'high in sugar' warning.
We did the sums to work out which drinks have the most sugar and which will — or won't — need a warning label, according to the current version of the regulations.
Fruit juices
While they didn't have any artificial sweeteners, all of the juices we compared — Fruugo sparkling apple juice, Ceres orange and Rhodes grape juice — had more sugar than all of the other drinks we compared except for Coke.
'Because they come straight from nature, people think they must be healthy. But it's not exactly the same thing as eating a single fruit,' explains Mphaphuli.
'Juice is highly concentrated and you need to dilute it with water if you're going to give it to a child [to reduce the sugar content].'
Supplied/Bhekisisa
Whole fruits are filled with fibre, which slows digestion and helps control blood sugar.
But that fibre is shed when fruit is turned into juice. Without it, sugar reaches the bloodstream faster, which can cause spikes and drops in energy.
Research has shown that swapping a fruit juice for some types of whole fruit three times a week can lower a person's chances of getting type 2 diabetes — likely because juice raises blood sugar faster and has less fibre.
A study published in the South African Journal of Clinical Nutrition earlier this year found that almost three-quarters of fruit juices have more sugar than the proposed limit.
But, as regulations stand now, only 17% would require a warning label because most of the sugar is natural, not added (because the regulations only look at the total amount of sugar in products with added sugar and not those with natural sugars).
Soda
Among the three sodas, Coke has the most sugar — and is the only one that contains caffeine, a stimulant, which means it speeds up the messages travelling between the brain and the body, and can therefore make you sleep less well.
Too much caffeine can lead to anxiety, restlessness and affect the way your heart beats.
The WHO says an adult should not consume more than six to 12 teaspoons of sugar per day.
A can of original taste 440ml of Coke contains 2.65 teaspoons of sugar per 100ml, which means an entire can contains about 11.5 teaspoons of sugar — more than the maximum WHO daily limit.
Sodas are some of the sweetest drinks you can buy and, research shows, South Africans love them: we drink an average of 254 Coca-Cola products per person per year, almost triple the global average of 89.
Before South Africa's tax on sugar beverages was introduced in 2018, which requires manufacturers to pay 2.1 cents tax for every gram of sugar that exceeds 4 grams of sugar per 100ml, the average 330ml can of soda had about 10 teaspoons of sugar.
But to avoid the tax — some producers changed ingredients in their drinks. For example, says Frank, Sprite and Fanta drinks lowered the sugar content but added non-nutritive sweeteners to keep the sweetness.
Supplied/Bhekisisa
While chemical sweeteners, which are often used in 'diet' drinks, can help people with short-term weight loss, the WHO says they should 'not be used as a means of achieving weight control or reducing the risk of noncommunicable diseases' like obesity in the long-run.
Meanwhile, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has listed aspartame, a sweetener found in diet drinks such as Fanta Zero, as a possible cause of cancer, though more research is needed.
The new regulations will require sugary drinks containing artificial sweeteners to carry the following warning on the front of the container: 'This product contains artificial sweeteners. Excessive consumption may be detrimental to your health.'
Manufacturers will also not be allowed to market such products to children.
'None of these products are recommended as part of a healthy diet because they don't contain any nutrients other than sugar and energy,' says Makoma Bopape, a nutrition researcher and lecturer at the University of Limpopo.
Bopape was part of the technical group who worked on the labels. 'What makes it worse is the fact that some contain sweeteners.'
Energy drinks
Monster has nearly four times more sugar than both Dragon and Power Play and all contain artificial sweeteners.
A 500ml can of Monster has around 13 teaspoons of sugar — more than the maximum sugar intake the WHO recommends for adults per day.
Energy drinks aren't just packed with sugar, like many sodas, they also contain caffeine.
Experts say teens who weigh between 40 and 70kg shouldn't consume more than 100 — 175mg of caffeine a day.
At an average of about 150mg, all three energy drinks contain almost the maximum amount of caffeine per can per day that experts recommend.
Under the proposed regulations, these three drinks would all need a warning label — either for high sugar or containing artificial sweeteners.
Flavoured water
Of the three flavoured waters we looked at, Bonaqua Pump Lemon is the only one that does not contain any artificial sweeteners.
Even though they're often marketed as 'healthier' options, the flavoured waters we looked at had similar amounts of sugar and sweeteners as sodas.
One option had both sugar and three sweeteners — making it more soda than water.
aQuelle naartjie and Thirsti berry use artificial sweeteners to keep the sugar low, but they respectively also contain nearly two and four full teaspoons of sugar in a 500ml bottle.
Bopape says plain water — not flavoured water — should be the preferred drink of choice.
Show Comments ()
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Medscape
8 hours ago
- Medscape
Alcohol and Pancreatic Cancer: New Evidence About Risk
Does drinking alcohol increase the risk for pancreatic cancer? Researchers have long suspected it does, but the evidence has remained inconsistent. Now, a global study of more than two million people is firming up the case that a link exists. The study, which pooled data from 30 prospective cohorts, found that daily alcohol intake was associated with a 'modest' increased risk for pancreatic cancer in both women and men, regardless of smoking status. However, the extent of the risk depended somewhat on how the researchers modeled alcohol intake. One model, which mapped continuous increases in alcohol consumption, suggested there is no safe dose of alcohol — any amount can increase the risk for pancreatic cancer, though only by 3% for every additional 10 g of alcohol per day or about two thirds of a standard drink. The other model, which compared risk by alcohol volume categories, found that the risk does not become significant until a certain alcohol threshold — about two to three drinks per day for men and one to two for women. Still, overall, 'our findings provide new evidence that pancreatic cancer may be another cancer type associated with alcohol consumption, a connection that has been underestimated until now,' the study's senior author Pietro Ferrari, PhD, head of the Nutrition and Metabolism Branch at International Agency for Research on Cancer, said in a statement. The co-author Jeanine Genkinger, PhD, MHS, had a stronger take on the findings. 'I think this shows that alcohol use is a robust risk factor for pancreatic cancer,' said Genkinger, associate professor, epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York City, noting that even more moderate drinking levels— no more than one drink for women and two for men — might be enough to boost pancreatic cancer risk. How Much of a Risk? The latest data, published in PLoS Medicine, come at a time of increased attention to the alcohol-cancer link. Earlier this year, then-US Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, MD, issued an advisory calling for cancer warnings to be added to alcohol labels. Major cancer organizations have determined alcohol to be an established risk factor for seven cancer types : those of the oral cavity, larynx, pharynx, esophagus, liver, breast, and colon/rectum. Despite the strong suspicion that drinking alcohol also contributes to pancreatic cancer risk, this aggressive cancer has not yet made the official list. The major reason is that the evidence surrounding an alcohol-pancreatic cancer link has been deemed 'inconsistent,' 'suggestive,' and 'inconclusive' by expert panels. Studies have been hampered by difficulties separating alcohol use from smoking — a known risk factor for pancreatic cancer — as well as varying findings by alcohol type and geographic location. In addition, certain studies highlighting a link have indicated that any association between alcohol and pancreatic cancer is driven only by more extreme drinking habits — more than four drinks a day, and sometimes as high as nine drinks. The latest analysis, Genkinger said, helps clarify uncertainty surrounding the alcohol-pancreatic cancer link, which is especially important for 'a disease where we don't have that many modifiable risk factors.' The findings are based on cohorts spanning four continents, all part of the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer. Just under 2.5 million cancer-free participants were recruited between 1980 and 2013 (median age, 57 years), of whom 70% were alcohol drinkers, 47% were never-smokers, and 64% were alcohol drinkers and never smokers. Most study participants were from North America (60%), followed by Europe or Australia (32%) and Asia (8%). Alcohol intake was modeled in two ways: continuously for every 10 g/d increase and by volume threshold, using 0.1 to < 5 g/d as the reference for nondrinkers. For context, in the US, the amount of alcohol in a standard drink is defined as 14 g of pure alcohol — equivalent to a 12-ounce can of regular beer, a 5-ounce glass of wine, or a 1.5-ounce shot glass of distilled spirits. Over a median of 16 years, the researchers observed 10,067 incidents of pancreatic cancers. In the continuous model, the risk for pancreatic cancer rose by 3% for every additional 10 g of alcohol consumed per day (hazard ratio [HR],1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04). This association remained consistent and significant among women and men (HR, 1.03 for both), current smokers (HR, 1.03), former smokers (HR, 1.02), and never-smokers (HR, 1.03), and across cohorts from Australia, Europe, and North America (HR, 1.03 for all), though not Asia (HR, 1.00). The research team also found evidence that the type of alcohol mattered: Alcohol from beer and liquor/spirits was associated with a significantly increased risk for pancreatic cancer (HR, 1.02 and 1.04, respectively) but alcohol from wine was not (HR, 1.00). This finding is in line with some previous studies suggesting that wine may have a different relationship with cancer risk compared with other alcoholic beverages. But Genkinger pointed out, this finding could 'reflect the ways in which people tend to drink different types of alcohol.' Wine, she noted, is often part of a meal, and people who favor wine may be less likely to binge drink than those who typically choose other types of alcohol. This study, however, did not survey participants about specific drinking patterns, including binge-drinking. In the threshold model, however, the increased risk only became significant once alcohol intake reached a certain level. For women, drinking one to two standard drinks per day raised their risk for pancreatic cancer by 12% compared with little to no drinking. For men, the threshold was a little higher: Consuming two to four drinks a day was associated with a 15% increase in risk, whereas drinking more than that was tied to a 36% greater risk. Overall, this research contributes to the growing body of evidence that pancreatic cancer should be added to the official alcohol-cancer risk list, according to Alison Klein, PhD, MHS, professor of oncology, pathology, and epidemiology, at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, who was not involved in the research. Having the Conversation The recent Surgeon General's advisory encouraged clinicians to inform their patients that drinking is a cancer risk factor — something unknown to most Americans, according to recent survey findings. 'I think this study is a good reminder to all of us to talk to our patients about their alcohol use,' said Edward Thomas Lewis III, MD, an addiction psychiatrist and clinical assistant professor at the Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina. Providers can take opportunities for those discussions during routine care, such as when prescribing a medication that can interact with alcohol or when a patient's health condition, such as high blood pressure or heart disease, can be exacerbated by drinking. 'I think these are opportunities to really remind people about moderation,' Lewis said, 'and to talk about some of the individual risk factors that may cause someone to make changes related to their drinking.' It's also possible that drinking might interact with certain genetic variants to modify pancreatic cancer risk — an avenue Klein and colleagues are exploring. What's challenging, Lewis said, is advising patients on what level of drinking is 'Okay,' given that even lower levels of alcohol consumption — around one to two drinks per day — may carry some risk. 'There is no zero-risk alcohol use,' Lewis said. But, he added, people do not necessarily have to abstain to see benefits, either. 'So it may be that a patient, at the end of the day, is able to reduce their alcohol consumption by two or three standard drinks over a given week. That still has a positive net effect,' he said. Another challenge is patients often don't know what a 'standard drink' looks like and can underestimate how much they drink. Showing patients visual examples — such as these— can be an eye-opener, Lewis said. Given the associations between drinking alcohol and many health outcomes, Genkinger said, it's important for clinicians to discuss alcohol use, just as they would discuss physical activity and healthy body weight. 'These are all lifestyle factors that have an impact on numerous disease outcomes, not only pancreatic cancer,' she said.


Bloomberg
8 hours ago
- Bloomberg
Gaza Famine Risk Grows as UN Warns Time Is Running Out for Help
Famine conditions in Gaza are worsening as time runs out to mount a full-scale humanitarian response, United Nations agencies warned, amid growing international outcry over the crisis. Food consumption and nutrition measures reached their worst levels since the conflict began, the World Food Programme and Unicef said in a report. That means two out of three official famine thresholds have been breached.


Medscape
9 hours ago
- Medscape
More Sit-to-Stand Transitions Benefit Postmenopausal Women
TOPLINE: Reducing sedentary behavior with interventions such as increasing daily sit-to-stand transitions might help lower blood pressure in postmenopausal women with overweight or obesity. METHODOLOGY: Researchers conducted a randomized controlled trial to assess how different strategies to reduce time spent sitting affected the physiologic responses of postmenopausal women who led sedentary lives. The researchers included 407 women in the postmenopausal phase (mean age, 68 years; 92% White) who had overweight or obesity (average BMI, 32), had a sitting time of at least 7 hours a day, and performed no more than 70 sit-to-stand transitions daily. The women were randomly assigned to one of three study arms: healthy living (n = 135), sit less (n = 136), and increased sit-to-stand transitions (n = 136). All arms received seven sessions of individual health coaching over 12 weeks. Researchers assessed blood pressure and markers of glucose regulation using fasting blood samples. Readings from thigh- and hip-worn accelerometers for 7 days were used to evaluate posture, sedentary behavior, and physical activity. Primary outcomes were measurements of glucose regulation and resting blood pressure at baseline and 3 months. TAKEAWAY: A total of 388 women completed the trial, with no serious adverse events related to the study. Participants in the sit-less arm had a daily sitting time of approximately 58 minutes less than those in the healthy-living arm (P < .001), whereas those in the sit-to-stand arm had 26 more sit-to-stand transitions daily (P < .001). Diastolic blood pressure fell by 2.24 mm Hg in the sit-to-stand arm compared with the healthy living arm (P = .02); the decrease in systolic blood pressure did not reach a predefined significance level. Compared with the healthy-living arm, neither intervention produced significant changes in markers of glucose regulation. IN PRACTICE: 'Postmenopausal women are at high risk of engaging in large amounts of sitting time and cardiovascular diseases. The present randomized controlled trial adds to existing evidence by demonstrating that within just 3 months, increasing' sit-to-stand transitions can lower diastolic blood pressure, the researchers wrote. SOURCE: This study was led by Sheri J. Hartman, PhD, University of California, San Diego. It was published online on July 25, 2025, in Circulation. LIMITATIONS: The generalizability of findings was limited by the lack of ethnic and racial diversity. The 3-month intervention period may have been too brief to observe sizeable physiologic changes. Measurement of only fasting glucose parameters could not capture changes after meals. DISCLOSURES: This study received support from the National Institute of Aging. Additional support was provided by the Altman Clinical & Translational Research Institute at the University of California, San Diego, funded by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences. The authors did not report any conflicts of interest. This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.