According to that thumbnail, it stunts your growth.

^I'll ^see ^myself ^out.

Sugars are metabolized by the body into ATP, therefore TECHNICALLY making it a “nutrient” enhanced drink. I see nothing wrong here.

I occasionally buy the version sweetened with stevia. I don't know how many nutrients are in it but it is at least healthier than soda pop. But the stuff is expensive so we only buy when it is discounted. I didn't realize they had been sued over this claim.

It’s got what plants crave.

Their advertising claims:

>vitaminwater’s claims at the time that it could reduce the risk of eye disease, promote healthy joints, as well as supporting optimal immune function when, in reality, the huge amount of sugar in the product promotes obesity, diabetes, and other health problems.

AND:

>CSPI also objected to the product names such as “defense” and “endurance.”

As for Coca-Cola's response:

>Coca-Cola fought back arguing that no reasonable consumer could be misled into thinking vitaminwater was a healthy beverage but last year a federal judge rejected this defense.

Seems like the kind of claim that should get that lawyer disbarred. It's fucking called Vitamin Water, without an ounce of irony in the labeling or advertising.

Well, that and the fact that sugar is also a nutrient. So by adding more sugar you're making it more nutritious... technically.

Is it healthier than soda? I’d wager that sugar water is about unhealthy as carbonated sugar water. Soda might be worse for your teeth, but neither is anything but horrible for you

Did you read what I said? There is no sugar in the drink that is sweetened with stevia. Try responding to the actual post.

[deleted]

>The "'general tenor' of the show should then info a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "Source

Coca Cola and Tucker Carlson were literally using the same defense. That basically a smart person would know we’re lying, but they’re not our audience or market.

Pretty sure even the regular variety was lightly sweetened compared to soda which can have 50 grams of sugar per bottle.

Probably shouldn't drink either but if I had to choose I'd take the vitamin water at 20 grams of sugar.

Must have had a s***** lawyer Because that Label looks like a medicine label that right there is a proven deception

Id take black coffee over both lmao

[removed]

Definitely, just saying soda is probably worse.

Iirc there's not a huge difference.

Fox News uses the same defense. It’s in the name but “no reasonable person” would take it seriously.

There's no sugar is diet (or "zero") soda, either. If you're going to compare what is effectively "diet" vitamin water to something, it should be that.

I'm sorry you are logically afflicted and clueless. I should have discerned that from your initial response. You have my condolences.

The state will always support capital

But... people are really stupid. And that's pretty reasonable.

I will always tell anyone who I ever meet that believes a word of Fox News that they successfully argued in court no one is supposed to take them seriously. (And of course more recent discoveries they never believed a word of the election lies, and were one of the first networks to require COVID vaccination).

I know it won't change the opinions of those who still believe Fox is news, but it's the small victories in life.

I'm probably wrong, but I believe words like "vitamin" and "supplement" have little legal definition, and so what qualifies as those are extremely lax. It's a similar case with "organic," where you can make a huge amount of claims because there's yet to be a very specific legal definition.

Its got electrolytes

43g sugar per bottle, i bought some zero sugar to mix with gin last week.

Holy shit! Its basically Mountain Dew.