• PineRune@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I very specifically remember the controversy 15-20 years ago when it was found that many of these pouches had mold in them, and you couldn’t see it because of the pouch or even taste it. I’m sure the quality control since then has improved, but any time I see a pouch of juice, I think about that mold incident.

    • VonCesaw@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      When they started doing the childrens semi-solid foods (applesauce) in similar packs, they had the exact same problem for YEARS

      The form factor sucks ass and I wish they’d find a better way for both types of product

    • cm0002@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Fine by me!..As long as whoever at Pepsi made the decision to only release Hard Mt Dew in “Zero sugar” versions is nowhere near it

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        That can’t be possible, glucose is required for fermentation to make the ethanol or it couldn’t be alcoholic. It’s the only reason college students could keep on weight where I was from.

        I wonder if it is all some marketing scheme where they are saying zero sugar because there is “no added sugar”. Basically making the non flavored malt alcohol, then flavoring it and adding artificial sweetener to get the sweetness.

        Otherwise if we could ferment and make alcohol without sugars, many people would start drinking 0 calories alcoholic beverages, as drinking 10 beers gives you about 1200 calories (bud light, miller light whatever shitty beers are around 120 calories a piece). Alcoholics would save 2lbs of weight gain a week there.

        • cm0002@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s probably all marketing, anything branded “Zero sugar” still has that ass tasting sugar substitute aspartame in it

      • BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        That annoyed me to no end. I have to wonder about the big push in artificial sweeteners recently; are they cheaper than corn syrup now? Are there enough people who are trying to cut back on sugar but also actually like the taste of dissolved copper in their drinks to keep soda profits high?

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Technically a shift from Mylar to PET might be more environmentally friendly, but yeah I would prefer cans or cardboard box drinks, you know: the ol waxed paperboard beverage carton

          • Soggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            No it’s not structurally “plastic” but it’s not biodegradable or reusable which is the point at hand so I think it was a reasonable comparison. (I also said “basically plastic” which clearly indicates similarity rather than equation)

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I imagine it’s pretty much the same amount of plastic as they’ve always had.

      • Zier@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Bottles are 80% more plastic than pouches and cost more. The only good part is those pouches are not usually recyclable at all and sometimes bottles get recycled.

        • paultimate14@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          “Sometimes” feels a bit generous. From a quick search I can find estimates that 5-9% of all plastic is recycled. It might be higher or lower depending on the specific kinds of plastic these bottles use, but most of it is probably ending up in a landfill anyways.

      • nadram@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        The correct choice would have been paper/cardboard bottles, which is easier to recycle

        • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          Juice boxes have a plastic lining, which is still better for the environment but not necessarily easier to recycle.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    In the United States, Kraft and its former parent company, the tobacco conglomerate Philip Morris Cos. (now Altria), have successfully marketed Capri Sun using strategies developed for selling cigarettes to children.[2] American parents often misidentify Capri Sun as healthy, and it is one of the most favorably rated brands among Generation Z Americans.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capri-Sun

    • curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The problem is right in the Wikipedia entry - its still way lower sugar than most competitors. So for an on-the-go drink, when the cup from home is dirty… Yeah its a healthier option than the others.

      It doesn’t make Capri Sun good, its just the others are so sugary that its one of the better options of readily available drinks.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Never knew anyone thought they were healthy. I mean I’m glad there is Vitamin C in orange Hi-C, but I know on the rare occasions I drink it that it is 10lbs of sugar in a 1lb cup

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Plastic bottles in general should be illegal. It’s cans, glass bottles, or GTFO when it comes to beverages for me.

    • Lettuce eat lettuce@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Glass has the best taste too, because it is almost totally chemically inert, you don’t get the odd flavor changes that you do with aluminum cans or plastic bottles.

    • isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      FYI cans have a plastic liner to prevent acidic foods from dissolving the aluminium, so there’s still some plastic in it (much less then fully plastic bottles tho)

      • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        We should really advance to “glass only” for single use containers (unless you have a really good reason to prefer plastic, like if it’s a medical product) and invest in the infrastructure to recycle them - a country can get up to a 99% recycle rate for glass if it puts the work in.

        Yes glass is potentially less safe but my gut tells me that the risk of more broken glass is offset by the reduced air pollution and associated health risks.

        • mipadaitu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          It’s more that it’s heavier, so you have to transport a lot more weight for the same amount of product.

          Secondary to that, glass can’t be shaped as compactly as an aluminum can or plastic bottle, so it takes up more room for the same amount of product.

          There’s no perfect solution, which is why we have a lot of options.

          • SSJMarx@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            There’s no perfect solution, which is why we have a lot of options.

            But in the category of “single use drinking containers”, all of the options besides glass carry with them more and worse externalities than what glass production and recycling carries. Which is why “having a lot of options” isn’t a positive in this case, it just means that a large part of the market is operating in a way that is more destructive to society than it needs to be.

            • MeThisGuy@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I dunno. it takes a lot more heat to melt and recycle some glass that plastic. that and the transport weight is a whole lot of extra environmental cost.
              and the whole separating by color thing in the recycling bins. best bet is to reuse the bottles for the same beverage by rinsing them back at the original bottling plant but that is a logistics nightmare

              • isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                it’s not a logistics nightmare, we used to do that until plastic gave us the idea of single use containers, many restaurants still do it with larger 1L bottles

                also, while yes glass does have a really high melting point, most plastics never get recycled and instead get burnt, releasing a lot of toxic chemicals in the air (and even if they weren’t, you can only recycle some types of plastics, and even if you did, new objects can be made only by some percentage of recycled plastic, and never 100%)

              • el_abuelo@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                5 months ago

                Aren’t they as equally unrecycleable as plastic?

                I can’t even put them in my recycling bin…which is where the glass and plastic goes.

  • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I have always, for the entirety of their existence, hated those dumb pouches. Good riddance as far as I’m concerned.

    • spyd3r@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      They made a really loud noise in the lunchroom if you inflated the pouch all the way, folded over the straw to seal it, then stomped on it really hard with your shoe. This was before mentally deranged people started shooting up schools though, so maybe don’t try it.

      • BigPotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Mentally deranged people have been shooting up schools since before Capri Sun was even invented…

        How old are you?

          • Mjpasta710@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            Columbine was far from the first school shooting. According to the Washington Post:

            “The first recorded school shooting in the United States was in 1853 at a schoolhouse in Louisville, Kentucky. On November 2, 1853, Matt Ward shot and killed teacher William H.G. Butler with a pistol hidden in his coat pocket.”

            • CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I think the very important point you’re missing is that schools did not exist in fear of school shootings before Columbine. There were no lockdown drills and crazy security measures for entering and leaving the building. So making a big loud noise would not make people instantly think someone was shooting up the school like it very well might today.

            • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              I know it’s not the first, I never claimed it was. But as someone who is old enough to remember what life was like before Columbine, that was the one that changed everything. That’s when we started having active shooter drills.

              Then 9/11 just amplified it.

  • collapse_already@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    But the original package seems like such an efficient way to injest micro-plastics. I hope the bottles have the annoying safety rings that are hard for people to open because they probably also produce micro-plastics.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      I can’t speak for how the different materials degrade over time, but at least the old mylar bags were shielded from sunlight.

      They were polyester-reverse side printed to aluminum then laminated to polyethylene.

  • TwentySeven@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    The article doesn’t actually say they are phasing out pouches, just that they are introducing bottles.

    • finitebanjo@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Yeah thats fair.

      The outrage might even be a result of corporate marketing strategy.

      Maybe I should alakazam the post?

      • Hawk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Seems they updated the article title, which now says the exact opposite of your post title.

        Unsure if you can edit. Here’s the new title:

        Capri Sun promises they aren’t phasing out pouches after reports of a switch to bottles ruined childhoods everywhere

  • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    I don’t care about the nostalgia, but they are going to stop being easy to squeeze into a lunchbox now, so I’ll find a different brand.