A fact from Diet soda appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 8 April 2004. The text of the entry was as follows: A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2004/April. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"Health risks"
Where it says drinking no soda is healthiest, it makes me wonder why. Diet soda, aside from the caffeine, is pretty much the same as water once it's been drank. So far as I'm aware, caffeine-free diet soda is as healthy and safe as water. Ralphael 21:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
Probably more health risks should be added, associated with each non-water ingredient:
I'm pulling the following statement:
It's unclear what it's talking about, and I don't know how to fix it, since some pedestrian research isn't finding me that 1.5% figure. What era? Surely not between 1958 and 1963, when there was only one diet soda available. If someone can fix this wording, feel free to put it back. TreyHarris 08:17, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
This seems prima facie unreasonable, considering what big business diet beverages are. No study has ever been made of the consumer demographics of a $30B industry? Do you have any citation to back up this claim? I was tempted to just remove it. TreyHarris 09:30, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
I don't think you can
Dear Trey: Interesting questions. I got the tidbid about the 1.5 percent of the total soda market's share at a website, I dont remember which but it must have been cocacola.com or something maybe, because it is a well known fact that Tab was the first diet soda...now, I asked myself, if Tab was the first diet soda, then why did diet sodas already accoubnted for 1.5 percent of sodas?
I do admittedly make research on other sites because I want to stick to the facts. That tidbit of info seemed somewhat confusing but I included it because that was part of what I found in my research but youre right, I mean mathematically speaking it doesnt make sense that Tab, the first sugar free soda, entered at a time where 1.5 of all sodas were diet. Then, mwe have to look to see what they defined as diet sodas then, maybe they were low carb, low something but I dont know..
As far as the other statement, I , at least havent heard of any study done on consumers. I guess I assumed that companies and study makers figure these products are only drunk by diabetics and fitness conscious people I dont know.
Thanks for noticing and God bless you!
Sincerely yours, Antonio suga u up Martin!!