Coca-Cola to use cane sugar in Coke sold in US, Trump says
In a post on social media outlet Truth Social yesterday (16 July), Trump said: "I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL cane sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so."
The company's classic Coca-Cola Original drink is made with high-fructose corn syrup in the US. The product is made with sugar in countries including the UK and Australia, while it contains cane sugar in Mexico.
Trump added: "This will be a very good move by them. You'll see. It's just better!"
A brief statement on the Coca-Cola website read: "We appreciate President Trump's enthusiasm for our iconic Coca-Cola brand. More details on new innovative offerings within our Coca-Cola product range will be shared soon.'
There has been increasing scrutiny of the recipes of food and drinks sold in the US since President Trump took office earlier this year.
US Secretary of Health and Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has accused the country's food and beverage sector of 'poisoning' the American population. He has also taken aim at the use of high-fructose corn syrup, describing the ingredient as "just a formula for making you obese and diabetic".
High-fructose corn syrup is a common ingredient in many soft drinks brands in the US, such as Mountain Dew and Dr Pepper.
Trump's comments on Coca-Cola's alleged reformulation plans have not been so well received by those producing the corn syrup ingredient.
John Bode, CEO and president of the Corn Refiners Association, said: "Replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar doesn't make sense.
"President Trump stands for American manufacturing jobs, American farmers, and reducing the trade deficit.
"Replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar would cost thousands of American food manufacturing jobs, depress farm income, and boost imports of foreign sugar, all with no nutritional benefit.'
"Coca-Cola to use cane sugar in Coke sold in US, Trump says" was originally created and published by Just Drinks, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
a few seconds ago
- USA Today
DC locals on Trump's attempt to force Commanders' name change: Stay in your 'own lane'
WASHINGTON − D.C.-area residents have a message for President Donald Trump who is threatening to derail the Commanders' pending football stadium deal unless the team restores its old name: Stay out of the city's business and do your job. Trump posted on Truth Social on July 20 that he may block a deal for the team to build a new stadium on the old RFK Stadium site if the team doesn't switch back to its former name, considered offensive to Native Americans. "I may put a restriction on them that if they don't change the name back to the original 'Washington (name),' and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, 'Washington Commanders,' I won't make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington," Trump posted. Steve Mahoney, 62, said Trump has 'bigger fish to fry' than pressuring the Commanders to change the team name. 'Focus on lowering prices, everything else that he said he was going to do that he's not doing,' he said. Mahoney, who retired from a career in pharmaceuticals, has held onto his love for his hometown team, the Chicago Bears. Now a Washington resident, he wants Trump to let both the capital city and its football team handle their own affairs, Mahoney said. 'The fans have adopted the new name," Mahoney said, "and there's no reason to change it back.' Jessica Brown, 48, said she only pays 'just enough attention' to the president to 'know how he can affect my life.' The stadium issue is apparently one of those cases. When it came to Trump's threats to block the RFK Stadium deal, Brown didn't hold back. 'He should just keep his nose in his own lane,' she said. Brown, a nurse from Alexandria, Virginia, just across the Potomac River from Washington, said she supported the Commanders and other teams changing their names to avoid titles broadly seen as racist. 'You should just choose other names. There are so many others,' she said. Her advice for local leaders involved in the stadium deal – 'ignore him.' Two new names, and then one stunning season In 2013, then-team owner Dan Snyder bluntly told USA TODAY: 'We'll never change the name. It's that simple. NEVER — you can use caps.' But once major corporate sponsors threatened to pull funding amid the George Floyd protests in 2020, Snyder and the league had little choice. Major League Baseball's Cleveland Guardians also underwent a name change around the same time and have been the subject of Trump's recent nickname crusades. The team rid itself of the former nickname in 2020 and went by 'Washington Football Team' for two seasons before the 'Commanders' rebrand in 2022. When the Commanders were sold in 2023, the potential for another name change became possible, although it was not a priority for the new regime led by managing partner Josh Harris. In a news conference at the conclusion of a stunning season − which saw the often cellar-dweller team come within one game of the Super Bowl − Harris essentially quashed any idea of a name change. The organization and players have embraced the 'Commanders' name − as have exuberant fans thrilled with the team's turnaround. But any name change would never have resulted in a reversion to the pre-2020 name. Last year, both parties of Congress worked together to pass a bill that gave the local D.C. government a 99-year lease of the land on which the RFK Stadium site and the surrounding acreage sit on the banks of the Anacostia River near the eastern edge of the city. The Commanders played at RFK Stadium from 1961-1996 and have played at NorthWest Stadium in Landover, Maryland – considered one of the NFL's worst stadiums – since. That paved the way for the Commanders and D.C. to hammer out a $3.7 billion stadium deal, which was announced in April. The agreement would cost the District a projected $1.1 billion, while the Commanders are contributing $2.7 billion. Trump's threat called a move 'to get attention' Griffin Lafayette, a Raleigh, North Carolina native visiting Washington, called Trump's threat to block the RFK stadium deal if the Washington Commanders don't revert their name back to the original nickname 'really stupid.' 'It's just on his laundry list of things to complain about to get attention,' said Lafayette, a 25-year-old football fan. Lafayette said he was 'all for' ditching the team's original name. Gerald Collins, 66, said he doesn't care about the team name, but he wants Trump to 'stay out' of the RFK stadium deal. 'He isn't a Washingtonian,' said Collins, a lifelong DC resident who works in construction. 'What he's doing is very wrong. He just wants to control things." Collins said he will always supported the team no matter its name. He hopes the deal moves forward because it will bring the team back to the area where he watched them play when he was growing up. Mayor confident stadium deal will get done D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, a champion of the stadium deal who earlier this year negotiated with the NHL's Washington Capitals and NBA's Washington Wizards to remain in the District, was asked about Trump's power to block the agreement. 'I think the thing that we should focus on in D.C. is doing our part," Bowser said. "I have worked for the better part of 10 years to get our part completed, including getting control of the land, coming to an agreement with the team and advancing a fantastic agreement to the Council. So we need to do our part. Let's focus on doing our part.' It is now up to the D.C. City Council to approve the deal. D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, a skeptic of the proposal, has yet to set a specific date for a vote on it. Public hearings on the matter scheduled for July 29 and 30. 'No, it wouldn't,' Bowser responded when asked whether the name being changed – even to the former name – would affect her support of the current stadium plan. The topic has been of growing interest to Trump. On July 6, Trump told reporters that he wouldn't have changed the name, although he elaborated that 'winning' could make the name for palatable to him personally. Steven Kiekel, 36, said Trump's threats to block the stadium came as little surprise – even though Trump announced May 5 in the Oval Office with NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, Harris and Bowser standing beside him that the 2027 NFL Draft is being held in D.C. 'Sounds like typical Trump being Trump,' he said. 'If they wait long enough, he'll get distracted, and it'll go through.' Kiekel, an engineer and Washington native, isn't an avid sports follower, apart from some soccer. But he lives near the proposed stadium in the shadows of the U.S. Capitol. 'It's tricky' because of Washington's unique relationship with the federal government, Kiekel said. Questions over Trump and the federal government's actual oversight of the land, especially under the new law, have emerged. Don't mess with success and leave the name, fan says James Anderson, 47, said he hopes Trump's threats don't force the Commanders to revert to their former name, mainly because he wants the team's good fortune to continue. 'They've been playing much better so I don't want them to change anything again,' he said. Last season, the Commanders advanced to the franchise's first NFC championship in 33 years. Maureen Brown, 57, said it would be a 'huge step back' if the Commanders returned to their former name. 'I don't want to see them go back,' she said. 'The Commanders is a fine name. 'The Red Wolves' would be good, too.' Brown, who has lived in Washington for 18 years, said she has never seen a game because their current stadium is inaccessible without a car. The team moving to Washington − especially to her neighborhood − would give her plenty of chances to see her favorite player, quarterback Jayden Daniels, in the flesh. Daniels was the 2024 Offensive Rookie of the Year after a record-setting season in which the Commanders went 12-5 under first-year coach Dan Quinn. Anderson, who works as security guard for federal buildings, moved to Washington from Texas 15 years ago and promptly dropped the Dallas Cowboys to support his new home team. He said if the Commanders leave Maryland for a new stadium in Washington, he would be able to go to their home games. 'I was a Redskins fan much longer than I've been a Commanders fan,' he said. 'But they have a good thing going now.' Trump's threats, he added, are 'only about himself' – not the team or its fans.
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Thune keeps door open to nixing August recess after Trump request
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said on Monday that he is open to President Trump's call to cancel the August recess as part of the GOP's push to quickly confirm his nominees. Thune told reporters that he was considering the move, alleging Democrats broke precedent by not allowing the expeditious confirmation of any of Trump's nominees. 'We're thinking about it. We want to get as many [nominations] through the pipeline as we can,' Thune said at the Capitol, adding that it would be 'nice to have' Democrats 'act more according to historical precedents when it comes to this.' 'Trump's the first president in history that hasn't had a [nomination] adopted by this point in his presidency either by unanimous consent or voice. Not a single one,' Thune continued. 'Trying to get his team in place is something that we're very committed to and we're going to be looking at all the options in the next few weeks to try and get as many of those across the finish line as we can.' In addition to nominations, the South Dakota Republican said government funding and the annual National Defense Authorization Act would top the to-do list if members are kept in town. Thune also said he and Trump have discussed the idea. Trump on Saturday urged the GOP leader to keep senators in Washington. 'Hopefully the very talented John Thune, fresh off our many victories over the past two weeks and, indeed, 6 months, will cancel August recess (and long weekends!), in order to get my incredible nominees confirmed,' Trump wrote on Truth Social. 'We need them badly!!!' Republicans have scores of nominees waiting to get the green light for confirmation, including via the Foreign Relations Committee. GOP leaders have also started to move judicial nominees to the floor.
Los Angeles Times
a few seconds ago
- Los Angeles Times
California sues Trump for blocking undocumented immigrants from ‘public benefit' programs
California and a coalition of other liberal-led states sued the Trump administration Monday over new rules barring undocumented immigrants from accessing more than a dozen federally funded 'public benefit' programs, arguing the restrictions target working mothers and their children in violation of federal law. President Trump and others in his administration have defended the restrictions as necessary to protect services for American citizens — including veterans — and reduce incentives for illegal immigration into the country. One of the programs facing new restrictions is Head Start, which provided some 800,000 low-income infants, toddlers and preschoolers with child care, nutrition and health assistance. Others include short-term shelters for homeless people, survivors of domestic violence and at-risk youth; emergency shelters for people during extreme weather conditions; soup kitchens, community food banks and other food support services for the elderly, such as Meals on Wheels; healthcare services for those with mental illness and substance abuse issues; and other adult education programs. California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta's office said states have been allowed to extend such programs to undocumented immigrant families at least since 1997, and the Trump administration's 'abrupt reversal of nearly three decades of precedent' amounted to a 'cruel' and costly attack on some of the nation's most vulnerable residents. 'This latest salvo in the President's inhumane anti-immigration campaign primarily goes after working moms and their young children,' Bonta said. 'We're not talking about waste, fraud, and abuse, we're talking about programs that deliver essential childcare, healthcare, nutrition, and education assistance, programs that have for decades been open to all.' The lawsuit — which California filed along with 19 other states and the District of Columbia — contends the new restrictions were not only initiated in an 'arbitrary and capricious' manner and without proper notice to the states, but will end up costing the states hundreds of millions of dollars annually. Bonta's office said 'requiring programs to expend resources to implement systems and train staff to verify citizenship or immigration status will impose a time and resource burden on programs already struggling to operate on narrow financial margins.' It also said that the impact of the changes in California, which has a huge immigrant population compared to other states, would be 'devastating — and immediate.' The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday. The states' claims run counter to arguments from Trump, his administration and other anti-immigration advocates that extending benefits to undocumented immigrants encourages illegal immigration into the country, costs American taxpayers money and makes it harder for U.S. citizens to receive services. About a month after taking office, Trump issued an executive order titled 'Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Open Borders,' in which he said his administration would 'uphold the rule of law, defend against the waste of hard-earned taxpayer resources, and protect benefits for American citizens in need, including individuals with disabilities and veterans.' The order required the heads of federal agencies to conduct sweeping reviews of their benefits programs and move to restrict access for undocumented immigrants, in part to 'prevent taxpayer resources from acting as a magnet and fueling illegal immigration to the United States.' Trump cited the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 as providing clear restrictions against non-citizens participating in federally funded benefits programs, and accused past administrations of undermining 'the principles and limitations' of that law. Past administrations have provided exemptions to the law, namely by allowing immigrants to access certain 'life or safety' programs — including those now being targeted for new restrictions. In response to Trump's order, various federal agencies — including Health and Human Services, Labor, Education and Agriculture — issued notices earlier this month announcing their reinterpretation of the 1996 law as excluding 'noncitizens' from more programs, including previously exempted ones. 'For too long, the government has diverted hardworking Americans' tax dollars to incentivize illegal immigration,' said Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. 'Today's action changes that — it restores integrity to federal social programs, enforces the rule of law, and protects vital resources for the American people.' 'Under President Trump's leadership, hardworking American taxpayers will no longer foot the bill for illegal aliens to participate in our career, technical, or adult education programs or activities,' said Education Secretary Linda McMahon. 'By ensuring these programs serve their intended purpose, we're protecting good-paying jobs for American workers and reaffirming this Administration's commitment to securing our borders and ending illegal immigration,' said Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer. The Department of Agriculture also said it would apply new restrictions on benefits for undocumented immigrants, including under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. However, the states' lawsuit does not challenge the Department of Agriculture, noting that 'many USDA programs are subject to an independent statutory requirement to provide certain benefits programs to everyone regardless of citizenship,' which the department's notice said would continue to apply. Joining Bonta in filing the lawsuit were the attorneys general of the Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin, as well as the District of Columbia.
