Comments on: A License To Think For Yourself.

By: Erica

Erica — Mon, 20 Nov 2006 01:58:18 +0000

It’s ridiculous that this woman would sue Coca-Cola in the first place. But it’s not like she’s got, you know, cancer or something. Insomnia and heartburn? WTF-ever.

By: liv

liv — Sun, 19 Nov 2006 13:41:15 +0000

It’s possible a 12-year old with no adult supervision in a very sheltered part of the world could believe that Coke is the new water. Theoretically. But I’ve never met that 12-year old. Not ever. Ditto for the 27-year old fashion (and likely figure/health) conscious woman who truly believed that.

And any adult who sues a soft-drink company over insomnia and heartburn? Is an effing opportunistic sociopath and a liar who’s making stuff up to score free money. Sleazy.

By: Lachlan

Lachlan — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 18:20:20 +0000

Elizabeth, as always, your comments are erudite.

However, I disagree about our Russians friends having the equivalent of third world education- even when it comes to health. The Internet is a wide open tool, even there- this information is OUT THERE. They have to be willing to look for it and think.

I also disagree about the contest marketing- it’s capitalism at its finest, like it or not. What I think is reprehensible is Cadbury-Schewepes’ claim abnout all natural. My ass! Coke is not making that claim, and so far as I know, hasn’t. So it STILL falls back on the people to make the right choices, and as the obesity rates and heart disease rates (esp. in women) show, people are NOT. They are not informing themselves, skating on genetics (if they think they have them in their favor), and generally ignoring nutritional common sense.

By: elizabeth

elizabeth — Sat, 18 Nov 2006 15:56:21 +0000

Perhaps we in the US tend to think that all over the world people are getting the same information as we are about all things bad.

I would venture to guess that over in Russia reports of the evils of soft drinks are not as wide spread as they are here. I don’t really know.

Also, here is a company giving people incentive to drink something they know is highly addictive. If caffine has been likened to heroin in its addictive powers, I’d say any company that makes such a thing has a certain sense of responsibility also.

I think it’s morally irresponsible for Coca Cola to sponsor any contest that invites people to consume more of its evil shit. It would be no different if a cigarette company had the same sort of contest.

I certainly agree that people should take personal responsibilty for their own choices, but Coca Cola should take personal responsibility for its choices too. Creating contests that invite people to drink more of your highly addictive product is not responsible.

By: Lachlan

Lachlan — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 19:31:23 +0000

Mary Sue, I imagine a study like yours would yield some startling results.

Glad you liked David! I try.

Kman, I know. I just want to scream when I read these sorts of things.

By: Mary Sue

Mary Sue — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 16:58:38 +0000

During the last two months she was pregnant with me, my mother drank two 2 litres of Coca Cola a day.

I want to do a study on kids with ADD (the real kind, not the ‘oh, hell, he’s trouble, give him drugs kind) and their mother’s caffeine consumption.

By: david

david — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 16:49:26 +0000

Sweet decaffinated sugar-free Jesus on a pogostick…

Lach, that expression is utterly pricless!

By: Kman

Kman — Fri, 17 Nov 2006 03:32:10 +0000

I agree 100%. Its ridiclous that any idiot can go and harm themselves–sometimes on purpose–and then turn around a sue a company because they should have protected them.