[CROSSHIGHWAYMAN]

Pepsi's Slurpee Success


By Motley Fool Staff
September 9, 2003
Summer is coming to an end, but it's not too late to indulge in one of 7-Eleven's (NYSE: SE) delicious and refreshing Slurpees. And now, thanks to a new formula from Pepsi (NYSE: PEP), you can have your Slurpee without all the associated calories (and there are lots otherwise -- 100 per 8-oz. serving).

Today's Wall Street Journal reports (subscription required) that 7-Eleven's new Diet Pepsi Slurpee, launched last month, is enjoying "strong sales increases." This seemingly unremarkable feat is actually the result of some pretty nifty science on Pepsi's part. A Slurpee's smooth consistency is a function of the sugar crystal itself, so producing a non-sugar Slurpee was no simple matter.

7-Eleven approached both Pepsi and Coca-Cola (NYSE: KO) last summer in an effort to develop a suitable diet Slurpee formula. Ultimately, Pepsi's scientists won out with a formula consisting of three sugar substitutes: tagatose, erythritol, and sucralose. The Journal says that tagatose, produced by Spherix (Nasdaq: SPEX), was instrumental in attaining the smooth Slurpee consistency, without freezing up the Slurpee machine as the syrup is mixed at 28 degrees.

Here's a stock for you......SPEX.....watch it climb.

[Support Free Republic]

A Recall AND a Fundraiser? I'm toast.

Let's get this over with FAST. Please contribute!

[sinkspur]

I will wager that, eventually, the culprit will be the carbohydrates.

As time goes on, Dr. Atkins' theory that high-glycemic carbohydrates are the most harmful substances we humans consume will be borne out.

[wideminded]

The research showed that cereal introduction before four months of age increased the risk four times of developing diabetes autoimmunity, or the antibodies that are the precursor to type 1 diabetes.

Research also showed children who were not given cereal until after six months of age were five times more likely to develop diabetes autoimmunity.

Either there's a mistake here or you'd better introduce cereal to your baby at exactly 5 months.

[Age of Reason]

Infant Cereal Linked To Diabetes

Well I wouldn't be surprised.

It would be no wonder kids get sick from eating something people may not have evolved to eat.

It was probably only after humans were forced by overpopulation to the back-breaking labor of farming that people began to eat a lot of grain.

[Cicero]

No question that breastfeeding is good for babies, and that they should be breastfed if at all possible. As to the rest of it, I'll pass. Who knows?

[goodnesswins]

It's probably more about the KIND of cereal....but they don't talk about that....babies need the OILS from GRAINS...I doubt that in most cereals babies are fed that they get those, ergo, maybe diabetes problems. Most processed grains (cereals) have little nutritional value except for what is unnaturally added back in...maybe that's why Asians feed their inutero and born babies....FLAX oils.

[LadyDoc]

Ah, that's why starving africans have so much diabetes. Their moms feed them cereal starting at 5 months, (just like most american moms add cereal at 5 months)...

More junk science. We're fat because we eat too much and don't work hard.

The Pima Indians have the highest rate of diabetes in the US: They are 5' and 200+pounds. Their Mexican relatives are tiny and slim and have no diabetes because they eat less animal fat and protein and work long hours at physical labour in the fields cultivating their crops.

Malnutrition is a great defense against diabetes...

[boris]

I am a (type II) diabetic. My understanding is (I am not a doctor) that Type I is "caused by a virus". It appears to be hereditary because the susceptability of the immune system to malfunction when confronting this virus is hereditary. Most normal people fight off the virus and that's it. Those "at risk" for Type I have an autoimmune response that attacks the insulin-producing cells in the pancreas when exposed to this virus.

Cereal? I think not...unless everything I've "learned" about diabetes is wrong.

--Boris

[ChemistCat]

My best friend handed my second-born, who was already not the best nurser, a french fry when she was 4-1/2 months old. That was pretty much it for getting anything nutritious into the kid. I could have tried gastric lavage, I guess. Since I refused to make mealtimes stressful times, I just tried to sneak healthy foods into her. We made spinach omelets, sweet potato pancakes, etc etc, for this kid.

And now this. My pediatricians told me that they need cereal around age 4 months, so that's what I did with the first two. The third one nursed till she was almost 3, with no solids until almost age 1 and then she just moved on to slow introduction of table foods--and she's the one who never seems to get ear infections, bladder infections....Mainly I had just finally figured out that there was nothing Gerber could do that I couldn't do better and cheaper with a blender or a fork.

They were all doing their best, but it just goes to show that if there's one thing you can count on with the "practice" of medicine, it's that they'll get it wrong before they get it right.

[Marie Antoinette]

I don't feed my babies infant cereal. They are breastfed until they can eat REAL food, not overprocessed flakes of grain from a cardboard box.

They are able to eat (without having teeth!) cooked carrots, potatoes, peas, broccoli and more! At 6 months my kids are more interested in just tasting different foods that the rest of us eat. We don't "do" baby food from a jar either. You can save SO much $$ by opting out of the commercially prepared baby goo market.

[waterstraat]

Hasnt diabeties had a great increase in the past few decades? Does this correlate to the amount of mothers who give cereal to their children compared to the few in the the 1800's or early 1900's??

[MHGinTN]

We have a little guy in the house who will be three weeks old on Wednesday. Thanks so much for posting this article!