Industry innovation doesn’t stop with products; it extends to our ongoing commitment to being a part of the solution to the complex issue of obesity and teaching people about the importance of calorie balance.  The total amount of beverage calories available in the marketplace decreased by 21 percent from 1998 to 2008, according to Beverage Marketing Corporation data.  And with our national School Beverage Guidelines, we have removed full-calorie soft drinks from all schools and replaced them with more lower-calorie, smaller-portion beverage options.  As a result, there has been an 88 percent reduction in calories from beverages shipped to schools since 2004.  Last year, our industry launched the Clear on Calories labeling initiative which puts new calorie labels on the front of every bottle, can and pack we produce – right up front and personal.  It’s just another way we’re providing information to consumers so they can choose the beverage that’s right for themselves and their families..

Thanks for checking in with us.  We appreciate it!

Hard-working families are holding their own in this tough economy, but they can’t afford higher grocery prices. There could not be a worse time to ask middle-income families to pay any more in taxes.  These taxes will just further squeeze families already struggling to make ends meet.  Check out this excerpt from the write-up:

“Nearly two-thirds of readers (64.2 percent) thought soda tax was not a good idea, with nearly a quarter saying they thought it was a ‘government cash-grab.’”

Have a look at the breakdown of the poll by clicking here.  And be sure to let us know what you think about the soda tax by commenting below, or checking in with us on Facebook and Twitter.

While today is a big day for our friends in the beer industry, we hope that you’ll remember the non-alcoholic beverage industry as well.  Our industry also offers plenty of fun and refreshing options for today’s celebration.  We have soft drinks, bottled water, sports drinks and energy drinks – some of which are even the perfect shade of green for the occasion!

However you choose to celebrate, enjoy the St. Patrick’s Day holiday.  And if you are drinking alcohol, make sure to pick a designated driver, and always look out for your friends.

Their latest attempt at “science-by-press-release” tried to whip up a scare that caramel coloring is harmful to consumers via a byproduct called 4-MEI. First, 4-MEI is virtually ubiquitous.  It’s found in a wide variety of foods and beverages, from baked goods and breads to molasses and coffee.  It forms during the heating, roasting or cooking process.  Caramel color is not a threat to human health even when it contains minute amounts of 4-MEI. Studies show that and FDA has agreed by classifying caramel color as generally recognized as safe. And that’s the affirmed position of the federal government’s health agencies, as well as regulatory agencies around the world.

Even the National Toxicology Program, the very group CSPI tries to cite in making its case, has not classified 4-MEI as a cancer causing agent, a fact which actually throws cold water all over the activists’ zealotry.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) does not identify 4-MEI as even “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” Click on the hyperlink for the details. Furthermore, Dr. Ernest McConnell, former NTP Director of NTP’s Toxicology Research and Testing Program, wrote that “4-MEI does not have sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity to be placed on the list.”

But there’s real world evidence as well. Consumers can take confidence in the fact that people have been safely drinking colas for more than a century, as well as consuming the wide variety of foods and beverages containing caramel coloring.  This petition is not based on sound science and is unnecessarily raising the fears of consumers.

Common sense would seem to also tell folks that our companies – some of which have been successfully in business for more than 100 years – would never put the safety of their consumers at risk. Safety is always their top priority.

Maybe some need to start taking a long, hard look at groups like CSPI, the misinformation they continue to peddle and the pecuniary interests they maliciously protect at the expense of the public’s interest. These folks should have to answer for the mud they sling.

These baseless and reckless attacks are beyond getting old.  It’s to the point that the public doesn’t know what health news to believe thanks to the sensational “study of the day” that promises to doom us all.

In a Rockford Register Star guest column published Friday, Marlow notes that soda taxes don’t lead to weight loss and, furthermore, that the notion that taxing soda saves other taxpayers money is simply not justifiable.  He also notes that a 2007 review of 25 studies on soft drink consumption and health published in the American Journal of Public Health showed that more than two-thirds did not find a significant positive link between soda and obesity.

More of Marlow’s work, done in tandem with Alden Shiers, who is also a professor of economics at California Polytechnic State University, can be found in an article, “Taxes on sugary beverages would do little to lower obesity.  Would Taxes Really Yield Health Benefits?,” in The Cato Institute’s Regulation magazine.

So thanks for your viewpoint, Dr. Marlow.  We agree.  Taxes do not make people healthier.  Making smart, educated decisions about diet and exercise do that.

Many florists suggest mixing a dash of citrus-flavored soda with water to keep flowers perky and bright.  So, as you take on the duties of host this season, don’t forget that soft drinks can be more than just a refreshing treat for your guests! 

Have a safe and happy holiday!

Our website features a section explaining the science behind hydration, and gives readers information on the amount of fluids they should be drinking every day. According to the Institute of Medicine, that number is 11-16 cups of total fluids for adult men and women, depending on your activity level and size. Adults and children can consume a wide variety of fluids each day, including water, juice, tea, sports drinks and soft drinks to meet their hydration needs – all of which are produced by our member companies.

To learn all about the multitude of hydrating options our industry offers, visit our products site. Check back with Sip & Savor for more ways to stay hydrated all winter long!

Hicks applauds the First Lady Michelle Obama’s ‘Let’s Move!’ anti-obesity initiative, one that our member companies support with the “Clear on Calories” initiative.  As part of this effort, our member companies will clearly display the calories on the front of cans or bottles as well as on vending and fountain machines.  This means that within two years, every time consumers touch one of our beverages, they will have calorie information they need right at their fingertips.

Also, America’s leading beverage companies have delivered on the national School Beverage Guidelines commitment, which removes full-calorie soft drinks from schools across the country.  Beverage calories shipped to schools have declined 88 percent!  We’re proud to say that this voluntary commitment is having a meaningful impact in schools across the country.

Finally, and as proof to Hick’s point that industry will respond to the incentives and demands of consumers, beverage companies continue to create more zero-calorie, low-calorie and reduced-portion size products.  In fact, since 1998, there has been a 21 percent reduction in beverage calories in the marketplace.

We support solutions that work.  We think that we all need to counter challenges like obesity with programs that improve nutrition education and expand healthy options for people, like the ones above.  Taxes have proven to be ineffective and miss the mark on obesity, and Marybeth Hicks’ op-ed certainly tells it like it is.

A few months ago, a national poll released by Rasmussen Reports also found that a majority of Americans oppose a tax on soft drinks.  And respondents strongly believed that lawmakers are far more interested in raising money for more government than in using tax revenue for public health.

Across the board, respondents have clearly stated in no uncertain terms that they do not support a tax on soft drinks that will inevitably go to paying for more government.

The facts remain that taxes such as those being talked about by some activists and policymakers are highly regressive, hurting the most those who can least afford it.  As lawmakers look for ways to address public health issues like obesity, we encourage them to focus on meaningful and lasting solutions – not simplistic solutions that will only fill budget gaps on the backs of their hard-working constituents.

Today, we thought it was a perfect time to share some timely news coverage with you from a few media outlets in places where beverage taxes have been – and perhaps still are – on the table:

• Yesterday, the Baltimore Sun reported that Baltimore City Council Members presented an alternate revenue plan to fill the city’s budget gap, setting a way forward that does not include Mayor Rawlings-Blake’s proposed 4-cent beverage container tax.

• “D.C. soda tax likely dead,” at least that’s the headline on “The Breaking News Blog” on the Washington Post as of just before 4:00 p.m. ET today. According to this post, “a majority” of District City Council members are opposed to Council Member Mary Cheh’s idea to tax sugar-sweetened beverages at a penny per ounce and Council Chair Vincent Gray is asking for other possible ways to fund the Healthy Schools Act.

• New York Gov. David Paterson proposed a beverage tax earlier this year, for the second year in a row, as a way to fill the state’s budget gap. Although a tax was not included in either the Assembly or Senate versions of the budget, the New Yorkers Against Unfair Taxes coalition has been hard at work educating people about why a soda tax is the wrong approach.  This afternoon, the Albany Times-Union “Capitol Confidential” blog reported that, while Gov. Paterson today suggested giving a state sales tax exemption to bottled water and diet sodas, the Senate Democrats just aren’t going for it.

• And in Philadelphia, the City Council convened once again today to pass a budget, which they did without inclusion of a soda tax.  Mayor Nutter held a press conference shortly thereafter, announcing $20 million in budget cuts.  You can read some reactions from members of the City Council on Philly.com.

We hope that policymakers in these cities and states truly follow through and do the right thing for their constituents.  After all, the last thing anyone needs right now are any more taxes, especially on items in their grocery carts.