There’s quite a controversy brewing (thanks, Scott Carney) over the pesticide content in Indian soft drinks. The vast majority of these are owned by the multinational Coke and Pepsi companies, and are of course manufactured and bottled locally in India using all local ingredients. 
The controversy actually began three years ago, with a report from the Centre for Science and the Environment that alleged high concentrations of pesticides in soda samples. The government at the time attacked the findings aggressively, and questioned the credibility of the scientists who conducted it. But as a result of the study, strict standards for pesticide content were put in place for the water that is used in soft drinks, though standards for the sugar and other ingredients that go into the soda still haven’t been finalized.
Now the CSE has done another study, and published the findings in its magazine, Down to Earth. The actual numbers, and notes on methodology, are available on this PDF. (I haven’t found a more formal, “science journal” style article indicating the methodology of the study in detail anywhere.) The CSE says it is testing the soft drinks using methodology developed by the American Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
There are stories floating around of farmers using Coke and Pepsi drinks as low-budget pesticides, which would be a rather grim confirmation of this finding if substantiated. Of course, it’s unlikely that the amount of pesticide in these drinks is actually killing any bugs (the study finds pesticides in the drinks in the range of 11 parts per billion); it might well be the citric acid or the phosphoric acid (on the other hand, wouldn’t bugs be attracted to the sugar?). As a commentor on Scott Carney’s blog points out, it’s not clear whether this is a widespread practice, or a bit of an ‘urban legend’.On the government side of things, a question this story raises is why they have been unable to finalize standards for all the ingredients for pesticides. The minister in charge of this task, Dr. Anbumani Ramadoss, seems to only speak a particular dialect of bureaucratese:
Responding to the latest study by the Centre for Science and Environment here on the levels of pesticides in soft drinks, Dr. Ramadoss said it was for the State Governments to routinely check the quality of items available in the market for human consumption as per various laws and this was being done.
Inviting CSE director Sunita Narain for discussion on the issue, Dr. Ramadoss said it was wrong on her part to allege that the Government had failed to notify standards for soft drinks.
He said the standards for packaged water had already been notified and the standards for sugar and concentrate would be finalised within the next six months.
The Indian Council for Medical Research was finalising the standards for sugar and had already met thrice, he added. (link)
Translation: You’re wrong, we’ve done it. Which is to say, we did part of it. The other part will be done in six months! So obviously, it’s already done, and shame on you for suggesting otherwise.
The other question this raises is why the government insists on setting standards based on ingredients, not the final product. If CSE can test the samples and determine pesticide content, why can’t the Indian government do the same tests? If the soda companies are in violation, the onus is on them to figure out where and how it happened, and fix it.
Perhaps, not being a particularly science-oriented person, I’m missing something here.
The relevant issue is how the pesticides got into the products. I would prefer a comparision test of the pesticide level in the groundwater in the locations where these factories are located. If the groundwater is “clean” then clearly, Coke/Pepsi need to be targeted. If the groundwater is itself contaminated – and there are good reasons for suspecting that this might be the case – then it is not clear that targeting Coke/Pepsi is going to achieve much other than perhaps forcing these companies out of India. The reason I suspect that the groundwater itself may be contaminated by pesticides lies in the fact that fertilizer is heavily subsidized in India, leading to inevitable consequences: overuse of fertilizers. I remember reading once that vegetables and fruits in India often have unacceptably high levels of fertilizers – I am sorry I don’t have a link ready.
I am also disturbed by the tone of the article in Down to Earth. It suggests that Coke/Pepsi is consumed by a significant fraction of the Indian population. Since the Indian population is more than a billion, the fact that “millions” consume these products is not in doubt but I would think that the Coke/Pepsi drinking population is still a small fraction of the total population. This does not imply that what is reported is incorrect, but it leads me to suspect an agenda beyond “reporting the facts.” One does not have to be a supporter of Coke/Pepsi to feel annoyed at such tactics.
The sad fact is that many more millions are denied access to safe drinking water in India. I do wish this issue would be targeted more seriously – but then it is hardly likely to garner the press that a negative story on Coke/Pepsi will generate.
Statutory Disclaimer: I am only an occasional consumer of Coke/Pepsi mainly when traveling on airplanes and I have no affiliation with either company.
Suresh, thanks for your comment.
I see your point. But aren’t there procedures for eliminating or reducing the amount of pesticide residue in processed food? The CSE article at least indicated that some kind of heat-based procedure was being debated with regards to the sugar added to the drinks.
True, safe drinking water should probably be a higher priority. But this at least is a narrow, fixable problem.
at least for Coke (and i’m sure its the same for Pepsi), the actual soft drink formula/syrup itself is manufactured outside and then imported into India where the other ingredients (water, phosphoric acid, citric acid, etc..)are added in the bottling plants. Obviously, Coke’s liability lies in not removing pesticides from these ingredients to acceptable levels before adding them to the syrup.
Amardeep, I am not enough of a chemist to answer this question. It is possible that there are procedures for eliminating the pesticides by breaking them up into safer products. One can imagine Coke/Pepsi resisting such procedures because it will undoubtedly add to their costs.
However, if the groundwater is the problem, then there is something hypocritical about targeting Coke/Pepsi when the real culprits – the government of India and the concerned state governments – are let off relatively lightly. Remember that the same contaminated groundwater is going to be used by the local people irrespective of whether they drink Coke/Pepsi. And the pity is the following – assuming that Sunita Narain’s campaign is succesful, the real beneficiaries will be the rich who can now drink their (more costly) Coke/Pepsi in the safe knowledge that there are no pesticides there. Meanwhile, the local poor will continue using the same contaminated groundwater. Not the outcome imagined by Ms. Narain, I’m sure.
Amardeep: The pesticide effect is exaggerated from what I’ve been told by people who live in India (family members) and that the sugar either acts as a diversion or invites other bugs to kill the more dangerous ones. The article you linked to states:
Great post. I remember reading about farmers in India using pepsi and coke as a cheap replacement for pesticide but my Father was a bit skeptical. Looks like troubles brewing over this issue again!
Thanks Amardeep for following up this story from my blog. One thing I wanted to point out however is the issue of using Coke on crops to keep insects at bay. It definitely happened in at least two districts in Andhra Pradesh–and a Coke spokesman even said on the record that he was aware of it. The question, however, is if it was a freak occurance or if farmers are still using it. At the moment I am not sure, but I may take a trip into Andhra to see for myself. Whatever the present sitation, Coke is having trouble with pesticides. One thing that neither of us mentioned in our posts, however, is that Coke is also a major player in water politics in India and has been clashing with farmers for a long time over access to fresh water. There have even been instances of Coke selling their waste byproducts to farmers as pesticide.
Here are some links that you might find interesting.
Links on the use of coke as pesticide http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,12559,1341454,00.html http://www.nationalpak.com/cock.asp http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/commons-law/2004-November/000960.html http://living.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1266512004
Here is Coca-Cola’s offical denial: http://www.coca-colaindia.com/faqs/myths-facts.asp
Here is a quote by a coke spokesman who says he is aware of a “single case” of using Coke in agriculture http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/comments/1500/
Independent research by the Telegraph in Kolkota that confirms the original Guardian story. http://www.telegraphindia.com/1041107/asp/nation/story_3975288.asp
Suresh (#2,4): I tend to agree with your assesment of the situation. Coke, Pepsi and thousands of small local bottlers of similar “soft” drinks uses local water. The water in general is already polluted with all sorts of impurities. According to World Bank – WTO article by Vandana Shiva in Aug/sept 2001, similar allegations problems were exposed with “Bottled Water”. Per this article in March 1999, “The Natural Resource Defense Council (NDRC) studied 103 brands of bottled water to find that bottled water is no safer than tap water. One third of the brands contained arsenic E. coli; one-fourth contained merely bottled tap water.” A study on water bottled published in JAN/FEB 1998 ISSUE OF Ahmedabad-based Consumer Education and Research Center magazine INSIGHT said that of the 13 known brands, only three conformed to all the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS)specifications. None of the brands were free of bacteria, though some brands claimed to be “germ free”, and 100 percent bacteria free. The current problem is pesticide in soft drinks, but one needs to get to the root cause of the problem, which is local water and lack of purification prior to using it in various soft drinks.
Anyone seen the recent movie ‘Corporate’ starring Bipasha Basu? I wonder if life is imitating art or the other way round…
suresh
is’nt it hypocritical to give leeway to coke and pepsi,who,fully aware of the contaminated groundwater, continue to bottle it?
I used to use Coca cola to clean my gun. Stuff cleans the powder residue right off. (you still have to wipe it clean and oil it further) An older friend of mine showed me the trick. I’ve only drunk water since.
Who’s talking about giving leeway to coke and pepsi? Did I imply that? The question is – who should be targeted for this scenario? I hold the relevant governments squarely responsible. I think, therefore, they should be the primary targets, not coke/pepsi who like many other companies in India, take advantage of legal loopholes. This does not mean that coke/pepsi should be lauded for what they do.
It should be pointed out that Thumbs Up and Limca are both owned by Coca-Cola; they bought Parle, the manufacturer of Thumbs Up, quite early in the game. People claim, anecdotally, that the formula has changed. I must say I haven’t the faintest idea what Thumbs Up tasted like in my youth compared to now; I couldn’t even say the same for Coke itself.
Thums Up has indeed changed – now it’s very sweet. Limca is the same. I was so psyched to see Thums Up at desi stores in the States recently but it’s not the Elixir of My Youth.
I’d like to see stats on pesticide levels in groundwater compared with those in the soft drinks in question. It’s easy to scapegoat the likes of Coke and Pepsi because of their visibility. Not that they’ve done their own image any favours though, I remember reading that in Rajasthan they lobbied to get uninterrupted water supply for their factories during a local drinking water shortage.
Coca-cola is also known for distributing its toxic waste as fertilizer to farmers.
“In 2003, the Central Pollution Control Board of India examined the waste from the Coca-Cola bottling plant in Mehdiganj, and found that it contained extremely high levels of lead (up to 538mg/kg), cadmium (up to 86mg/kg) and chromium (up to 134mg/kg), effectively making it hazardous waste.”
Source: http://www.ashanet.org/austin/mehdiganj/faq.html#q5
Amardeep,
Can’t blame the minister. If he had instituted an enquiry, it would’ve pointed back right at the government. Remember, it is the contaminated water that is a problem. And by extension, if the Lok Sabha wants Coke and Pepsi to be banned, they ought to ban drinking water as well.
Aside: the CSC is not a scientific/governmental organization as its name suggests. It is a political-activist organization that for some reason, has brought upon itself to battle Coca Cola and Pepsico. If they really wanted Indians to drink non-contaminated water, they should’ve criticised the various water-boards and municipal corporations who do such a shoddy job of supplying water. Their efforts reminds one of the Commissioner D’Mello’s line in ‘Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron’; “Amrika mein kya system hai. Wahaan peenay ka paani alag aur gutter ka paani alag hai.”
I can’t understand this uninformed CSE bashing and blind soda company defence. CSE has a very good website and they cover all these and more objections. Please take a few minutes and try to understand the issue. The cola companies have been preventing the drafting of tough standards. http://www.cseindia.org/misc/cola-indepth/cola2006/cola-index.htm
If the standards are notified, then cola companies and govt (gasp) can be held liablefor quality of those standards. There is not much you can do, if there is no standard to begin with
Coca Cola reportedly has a sordid history in india. See here, here, and here.
Further, it’s not just India.
Plus they destroyed Thumbs Up.
Saurav,
Is there a God given right somewhere that Thumbs Up, initially being of local pedigree, can not be destroyed?
Let the market decide whether Coke is needed in India. No need to impose your version of the truth on others. If there is a problem with their product, the market is free to reject that product. If people are so disaffected by the lack of regulation, why don’t they approach the consumer courts?
In defence of Coke as well as Pepsi, for every single direct job created by the Coke, more than 20 indirect jobs have been created in India. This includes the sectors of agriculture, retailing, distribution, and advertising apart from manufacturing.
I know your vision of the world involves everybody protesting and getting their income from government handouts. However, there is a significant proportion of people who like to work hard and get their money. Do keep that in mind when engaging in political rhetoric!
Regards,
So what are the alternatives available in a duopoly, where both players are guilty ?
How does soda help agriculture?
The bigger issue is contamination of ground water, even if drawn from tubewells 200mts deep. But ofcourse, being leftists, we will hop on to the ‘curse coca-cola bandwagon’, contaminated drinking water can wait.
After all, contaminated drinking water will maim, atmost a few hundred thousands or a few millions of babies, coca-cola aims at world domination – which in itself is not bad – but they are evil capitalists !! Saving babies can wait, we have to save the planet first.
Voiceinthehead,
By dupoly, you mean – Coke and Pepsi? I hope I did not misunderstand you.
What I meant was let the people choose whether they want to drink soda or not. There are lot of choices available to people in India who can afford to buy a bottle/can of soda. By saying that give people the choice, I did not mean let them choose between Pepsi or Coke or some other soda. Leave the decision to them. We do not have to shout at the top of our voices that Coke is evil! If some organization is really concerned about the products of Coke and Pepsi, why not go to the courts? Why create such unnecessary hullabaloo of political nature against the two companies?
I do not drink soda for health reasons (too much sugar and calories) but I do believe that I have no right to force others to make the same choice. Let individuals take action as they please according to their set of morality or sensitivity to the issues. The collectivists try to portray everything as good v/s evil (Coke/Pepsi)in order to push their agenda. In the process, they polarise the society and hijack the issues. Later on, these are termed as “class wars”, the battle between “haves” and “have nots”.
Pepsi sells more than soda in India. They sell a whole range of potato chips and fast food snacks like “Kurkure”. Where do you think the raw material for these food products come from? They are supplied by Indian farmers. When you attack these companies, you attack hundreds of thousands of people who earn their livelihood because of these companies. They are ordinary people and are not afloat in cash. For every bottle of soda sold, some artist in an ad agency, some delivery boy with a retailer, some security guard with a distributor etc. gets paid. Think about them!
Lal Salam, I agree with you completely. Your interpretation of the whole issue and the points raised by Suresh earlier hits the nail on the head.
Regards,
Yes, I was referring to Coke and Pepsi. Thanks for your clarification. However I have to disagree with your observation of “hullabullo of political nature against coke and pepsi”. There is more to this issue than kneejerk blind anti-corporatism/anti-coke/anti-LPG.
You cannot go to the courts, if what you do is not crime in first place. CSE has brought to light the lack of clear guidelines in the first place.
Coke & Pepsi’s behaviour since the whole issue has come to public scrutiny is very dishonest and despicable. They might not be the only or biggest culprits, but they are no small culprits. Their flip-flops in the court and attempt to dilute, delay and destroy the standards are despicable. I have no sympathy that they are unfairly singled out by politicians. And its just not leftists, it is BJP which is demanding that their ad campaign be banned.
CSE has been highlighting environmental issues in India, long before it is fashionable. Pesticide campaign is what caught public imagination. But they have taken govt/corporations to task on various issues umpteen number of times.
The issue here is environment, it is not about leftists vs markets. You are using the economic views of some people who support the campaign to discredit the facts of issue.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality
voiceinthehead: “The issue here is environment, it is not about leftists vs markets.”
With the CSC? Not quite.
Here’s what I wrote three years back in my old blog. [For some reason, the comments have been wiped out. There were many good ones there.]
This link may work better. Scroll down for my article titled “An ethical dilemma”.
Of course not. I just happened to like it and it would have been nice if it had been preserved. It tasted good and reminds me of my childhood. I assumed sentimentality was acceptable in “the market” 😉
Wow–you’ve really nailed it on the head here; thanks for reading my mind and redbaiting me. I would have hoped you would use your telephatic abilities to find some information to address the four examples I provided of Coca Cola allegedly engaging in destructive practices. I would love to know what you propose to do to address groundwater contamination aside from being dismissive toward people who raise the point.
Saurav:
the 4 examples you provide come from some highly ideological and strident sources. If the roles were reversed, I know you’d take such allegations w/ a grain of salt.
to be fair, I appreciate the fact you uses the word “allegedly;” After all, ann coulter alledges that clinton is gay.
There is an article in the Times of India today that states that even the growundwater in India is contaminated with pesticides. This gets me wondering….why are only the two big cola giants being targeted? Oh I know it’s nothing new..it’s a shakedown.
That groundwater in several parts of India is contaminated is a given. To justify the presence of pesticides in the two colas on this ground is not palatable. These two giants have grown up following the stringent standards set by FDA in the US. Why can’t they do the same in other countries. They are big enough to tackle the peroblem by decontaminating the water, if at all the ground water do really have pesticides, and can absorb the cost. If they are not ready to do anything they should be made to pack their bag once again.
For Americans, concerned with the “ethical” behaviour of “American” companies abroad, this concern is fine. For Indians like myself, the points to note are (i) Coke/Pepsi are no better/worse than “Indian” companies – they use the legal loopholes in India for their own benefit, (ii) Coke/Pepsi are consumed mainly by the rich. Even if this campaign is successful, it will mainly help the rich because they can now drink their favourite soft drinks without worrying about pesticides. The poor who don’t consume Coke/Pepsi will continue drinking the contaminated water. and (iii) the fault for the legal loopholes lies with the relevant governments who should be targeted.
Putting everything together, I would rather that an Indian organization like CSE focused its attention to (a) targeting the real culprits, and (b) running campaigns designed to help the poor rather than running one whose prospective beneficiaries are likely to be only the rich.
The one case where targeting Coke/Pepsi may actually help the poor is one where Coke is in dispute with some local communities over the use of groundwater. Apparently, Coke is overusing groundwater leading to problems for the local community. (See the above references by Scott Carney.) Even here, it is not clear whether Coke is actually breaking laws or – more likely – using the legal loopholes in India to indulge in unethical but legal activities.
#26: Quizman From what you have written on your blog.
Independent tests by govt labs and JPC probe have upheld CSE’s contention. CSE has never hid the fact that groundwater as a whole is contaminated and was always calling attention to lack of standards. The “socialism in India -meri jaan” presentation you linked to points exactly to that.
You seem to agree that coke has no nutritive value. This explains why that is relavent. http://www.cseindia.org/misc/cola-indepth/poison.pdf
I heard an example of this from my Dad’s freind who runs a Environmental control business aimed at Chemical factories. He said that a prominent Chemical Co. (stars with M, and publically traded on BSE/NSE in India) dug a bore-well to dispose off its chemical waste, which ended up in local wells. I was shocked.
voiceinthehead: My post was written before the probe was called. The Lok Sabha had banned aerated drinks in parliament based on the CSE report. Many people, including me were aghast as this was clearly a knee-jerk albeit calculated political move. I am not expressing any sympathy with COke/Pepsi. They should ensure that their product, regardless of the contaminated ingredients, are free from pesticides. I am merely suspicious of CSE’s motives.
Btw, just for clarity, are you associated with CSE in any way?
Nope, Not associated with CSE in anyway. Haven’t heard of them till the coke controversy blew up. But I am on their mailing list and they bring intresting stuff to light. Hope someday I will have enough money to subscribe to their magzine.
Voiceinthehead,
Read the link: “See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality“. I loved the explanation. However, I must say that I did not understand it completely as I am not a trained economist. I will have to chew on it for some time. Thanks for the information.
“There is more to this issue than kneejerk blind anti-corporatism/anti-coke/anti-LPG.” I think, the people, who are lending their voice to this issue and raising the shrilness of the debate, belong to the category of “anti-corporatism/anti-coke”. There might be some genuine activists but I doubt whether they will have any say in this issue in the final scheme of the things. I trust the “Pinkos” completely to use their power play to hijack this issue in the future if they have not done so already. For example: your link from Asha shows Nandlal as the main point man in UP. But we all know that this movement has Sandeep Pandey’s red/pink beard prints written all over it.
“You cannot go to the courts, if what you do is not crime in first place. CSE has brought to light the lack of clear guidelines in the first place.” I do think that courts have a role to play. I find it unbelievable that lawyers can not find anything that suggests violation of consumer or environmental laws in India by Coke/Pepsi. Is the first statement in the quotes somehow trying to justify this movement against the companies on the streets – trial by the public in the courts of conscience? I have nothing but contempt for that.
I do not know whether CSE has an agenda. If you notice from my posts earlier, I never objected to the eligibility or the intentions of CSE. Quizman has shed more light on that. If Coke and Pepsi are found guilty, they should pay the price for their negligence. Similarly, if the government is found guilty for being lazy in coming up with suitable environmental guidelines, they should be held accountable. But what I foresee is a witch hunt of Coke/Pepsi based on the economic ideologies of the activists who are spearheading this movement. It has happened in the past in India and it has the potential to happen in the future too.
Your link on externalities does talk about negotiations between the parties and government intervention to take account of the social costs. It does not talk about banning the companies and making them close down based on political rhetoric to take care of unpleasant social costs.
“The issue here is environment, it is not about leftists vs markets. You are using the economic views of some people who support the campaign to discredit the facts of issue.” I agree that the issue is about environment. But protection of the environment has to be seen in the context of people and economics. Otherwise, it is bound to fail. “Economic views of some people who support the campaign to discredit the facts of issue” are important. We are not playing a game here. The choices made by these people affect the life of thousands of real people and their families just as much as the environmental pollution.
Saurav, I say this in colloquial Bengali in jest – “Choto ekta khocha ditei, phete haathe eshe galo! Tahole, ki kore joi korbe sara sanshar?” Translation: Just a small prick by me managed to destroy your composure. If this is so, how will your ilk run the world?
Unlike you, who has spent his childhood in the comforts of capitalist countries exploiting the rest of the world and subsequently developed a contempt for them, I have spent a decent part of my childhood and adolescence in the red bastion of India. Needless to say, I did not find it much palatable for my taste and much prefer the comforts of capitalism.
Dear Friends of this earth, I lready posted this on two different blogs, because the more I get into this subject, it really drives me crazy. and this is not about big american corporate groups. When I first read of the study of the Centre for Science and Environment (of 02 August 2006), I was shocked. I wanted to know if it is true what Vijay Kumar Malhotra said “These companies are playing with the lives of millions and we canÂ’t ignore such warnings any more, and we can’t ignore such warnings any more. It is time to ban them.” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/72b72162-241f-11db-ae89-0000779e2340.html And I wanted to know why the political reaction was so strong and fast.
So I did some research on the net, and was I found was closer to what the Financial Times wrote at the end of their article of yesterday: “Almost any product in India, from tap water to milk, contains traces of toxins due to overuse of pesticides by farmers. This seeps into local ground water, which is used in more than 80 per cent of soft drinks.” http://www.ft.com/cms/s/72b72162-241f-11db-ae89-0000779e2340.html and this many of you already posted about.
There are two studies of Government research institutions (the Central Food technology Research Institute http://www.cftri.com/ and the Central Food Laboratory http://mohfw.nic.in/kk/95/ia/95ia0201.htm) of 2004 that are quoted by an ad of Pepsi, which gave one simple message: 1) Trusted Laboratories (under democratic control, other than the CSE) have proved two years ago, that the pesticide residues in Pepsi brand beverages are way lower than limits set by the Health Ministry 2) The Tolerance of government standarts for comparable products like tea are 28000 times higher! http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage_c.php?leftnm=11&bKeyFlag=IN&autono=3976
In this moment nobody knows who to believe, but when you see at the same time how angry and loud some politicians and the CSE are screaming at the “evil US-corporates” Pepsi and Coca Cola, I think the basic conclusions to be drawn are:
1) Yes there are pesticides in all our products and the drinking water in India, which should worry us 2) Yes the government limits for pesticide residues in our products are way to low (and havenÂ’t developed much in the last years since the last scandal) 3) Blaming Pepsi and Coca Cola is an anti-western populist agenda that has nothing to do with the problem. Even the study of CSE does no comparison to our traditional drinks as Tea (because normal Water in Tea or Coffee is less filtered than the one in Pepsi!) 4) There should be a new independent study that compares comparable products! 5) It seems to me way safer to drink Pepsi than to get a tea in India
I am happy for any comments and conclusions of other people who did deeper research in the topic! Best wishes, Prasanna
Dear people, when I read all this it seems that everybody knows a lot of details about the subject, but I like to see it more simplified (or to put conclusions out of these details):
it is good that the Indian government set up a commission to set standards fro future testing (because then a strange laboratory like CSE cannot mess up Indias reputation so easily any more), and with the pressure of the situation they have good chances to succeed
I agree with Prasanna (even if I don’t like softdrinks so much!) that it must be safer to drink Pepsi than Tea, because I don’t think that anybody tries to poison India on purpose and since 2003 Pepsi and Coke were pressured to betterise their standards (and nobody else was pressured then!)
Just read this on Time
Propaganda against the soft-drink manufacturers led to public fury and cola bans in many states. Many of us didn’t know what to believe. Now this from Sunita Narain of CSE:
TIME
WHAT???
The CSE study – politically motivated and untrue
Today there are two very helpful articles in the news:
1) shows that the left government of Bengal tested the drinks again and did not find anything of the high pesticides levels!
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=137539
2) gives a good background about the whole controversy, showing how politically motivated the attack against the two corporates were:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/HH17Df01.html
and when Tom speaks abou the added sweeteners (sugar), he should try to drink tea or coffee in India without lots of sugar 😉
PEPSI HAS PESTICIDES
COKE HAS PESTICIDES
DO NOT FEAR
DRINK BEER i am not very articulate but i hope my suggestion solves this problem.
Here for new updates about cock and pepsie soft drink used in world (Consuption)
Here for new updates about cock and pepsie soft drink used in world (Consumption)