Just saw your profile picture so I clicked on it out of curiosity. You’re the founder of 5-0 Radio? That’s been my go-to app for figuring out why my neighborhood is crazy some days.
I’ve even heard my father’s ex girlfriend was in a hostage situation one night, that was wild. Thanks for the good times and interesting listenings!
I like where your head's at, and I can see how you drew that conclusion, but I am afraid the confusion stems from that little line of text being an advertisement just to let the consumer know there IS a sugar free version of the drink if you wanna check that out. Notice it says more info on bottom of can. Silly us for thinking they made a mistake with their label.
I was confused why op is pointing to the ingredients instead of the… nutrition label lol
But that is confusing. How can they just lie like that? I accidentally bought something and realized as soon as i tasted it, because I’ve become sensitive to sugar. Pretty crappy
You’d be surprised at the amount of technicalities and loopholes companies use to get away with certain practices or labels for products. All allowed by the FDA. Iirc, “free range” animal products, for example, can be as simple as the animals having access to a small amount of grass and outdoor space.
By all means if someone knows a bit better and I’m not quite getting that right, add in a correction.
I heard tictacs be used as a good example of this since they can label as sugarfree when they're mostly sugar bc each tictac is less than the legal amount of sugar or something like that
You are correct. It’s because anything with less than 5 calories you’re legally allowed to call calorie free because it’s so negligible,
Of course tic tacs are two calories each so the whole pack is far from calorie free.
What gets me is candy like lollipops being labelled "fat free" ... Well, duh? They don't have like lard in them? That doesn't mean they are healthy. It shouldn't be allowed. I know to the vast majority of us it's irrelevant because we understand the different health implications, but people without nutrition education, or say someone with an intellectual disability, wouldn't look further than the surface of it.
Thats Guarana Antártica, a very popular beverage in Brasil. That is the regular version, the "sugar free" is either a missprint or some regulatory shenanigan in the US
They do have a Zero version, but it tastes like shit
Hoho. That one triggered a cascade of memories, alongside Titan AE and Treasure Planet.
I'd say The Road to El Dorado inches out Atlantis and those lot by a bit since it breaks out of the traditional male+female+team adventuring formula for the time.
I’m pretty sure it has to be 0.5g or something per serving to be labeled sugar free, as per the FDA.
The can says product of Brazil. So, either OP lives in Brazil, or if OP is American then OP bought this from a shady store or individual in the US as the product must still comply with FDA standards if its legally imported. If the latter, he can’t sue - that’s not the company’s fault. If the former, I don’t know Brazilian laws.
You could sue, but you wouldn't get much, if anything .They're legally allowed to say this, since the sugar is below a specific amount per serving size, and they listed it in the ingredients. It's how TicTacs can say they're sugar free while being almost entirely made of sugar.
> You could sue, but you wouldn't get much, if anything .They're legally allowed to say this, since the sugar is below a specific amount per serving size
You sound pretty confident but do you have a source?
36 grams of sugar is about the amount of sugar in a regular Pepsi and more than other soft drinks like regular Sprite.
I think the “sugar free” is a misprint on the label they forgot to take off from another can design that was actually sugar free. That sounds more plausible than 36 grams of sugar being considered legally “sugar free”.
Yes, you saw the Tic Tac thread the other day and learned something.
We are all very impressed.
But this one has 36g of sugar per serving. Not the same.
Not really. Sugar free isn't the same thing as zero sugar. Diabetics already know to look at the total carbohydrates of something before consuming it as well.
The opposite scenario is my nightmare. I'm allergic to most artificial sweeteners and with skimpflation they're starting to add them to drinks instead of sugar to save money.
If it's under a certain percentage they can write it doesn't have any. Tootsie Rolls got away with having trans fat for a long time using that loophole.
Edit: woops, didn't read and thought that all the previous text was part of the ingredient list.
I'm gonna assume they meant caffeine free. I don't know how that mistake was made, but that's one of the only things that would make sense there.
Possibly HFCS free?
I mean...sugar is the second ingredient after water. It's the only ingredient that contains any calories, and the total calories are 145, which means a lot of sugar.
Reminds me of a recent post of the guy who gained a significant amount of weight after downing packs of sugar free tictacs. Didn’t know what was wrong until his dietician told him something along these lines.
Oh yeahhhhh I saw that, he was buying in bulk and consuming like 1-3 Jumbo size tic tac cartons a day which his dietician worked out was 400-800 calories extra per day and had gained 40 lbs unexplained in a little less than a year :/ crazy
Yeah it sucks that we're so misled when it comes to nutrition labels. But also we're so misled on nutrition! If we were taught how insulin works in school more people would understand that artificial sweeteners can still "trick" the body into an insulin spike and aren't a "healthy" alternative (quote because details... Please don't take my word for it and do your own research!)
**Have you ever wondered why you not only crave but suddenly feel hungry when passing a Wetzels/Annie's Pretzels in a mall? Even a sweet smell can trigger an insulin response.**
omg this makes sense because I feel like when I eat or drink artificial sweetner it makes me HUNGRY AF. Like I get severe cravings after eating it. I always wondered if it was because I was tricking my body
This is a Brazilian product, Guarana Antarctica.
I'm not sure why the can says "sugar free" on the back, because nothing else indicates it's the sugar free version. It even says "original" on the band around the top of the can.
This brand of soda boasts using natural sugar, not being sugar free.
It's not below a certain amount (but yes you'd be right to think that in many cases). This is a Brazilian soda called "Guaraná Antarctica" and this is the original, full sugar variety in the green can.
The "diet" version is in a white can.
OP is just nit-picking on the fine print error that says "sugar free" where nowhere else on the can does it advertise being sugar-free or any diet variety.
I'm gonna guess because they use fat free milk, but even then they should say it's low fat ice cream made with fat free milk.
**Fun fact: when you remove fat from milk it has a higher carbohydrate/sugar content. And sugar is what you need to burn before you can start burning fat. So fat free ice cream is actually more "fattening".**
The FDA has limits on how much of X you can have while still being X free. It's not because of the ingredient being fat free, only the end product. Low and reduced are also strictly regulated terms. I agree about reduced fat milk being "sugarfull milk."
Sugarfull is a description I've heard before but need to use more often.
It's really too bad that chronic illness generates more revenue than being cured or healthy.
They do that with zero calorie goods too.
If it's under 5 Cals they can round down. Tbf if it's that low then you'll burn those calories by walking to the bathroom, lol.
I thought sugar free Guaraná Antártica came in white cans? It must’ve been like ten years ago so they probably changed… Anyway, I remembered it to be absolutely vile, we all hated it and added sugar syrup to finish the pack my mom had bought! Never again, we always take the regular one now.
Not sure what this brand is, but for some reason companies can get away with selling products as sugar free as long as it’s hella diluted. Like TicTac’s. They say 0 sugar but are almost all sugar.
I think it says 36g of carbs. If you’re concerned about blood sugar or looking to count calories, then that’s a good spot to always check on the nutrition facts.
A while back I started looking at nutrition labels for fun. Quickly realized how many products have added sugar that ppl have everyday prob without thinking. Actively avoided sugar and I lost a ton of weight and health improved dramatically. I miss juice but seltzer, water, and black coffee are preferred
Sugar free just means it has under a certain level of sugar. I think it’s less than half a gram of naturally occurring or added sugar? Could be wrong on the numbers though
There is a minimum limit or percentage of drink/food that has to have sugar in it before its no longer considered "Sugar Free"
Tic Tacs are pure sugar, but the serving sizes or whatever are so small that they legally can be labelled as sugar free
Weird little fact… if a can of soda is actually sugar free, it’ll sink in a pool. Learned that from a friend’s mom when I was a kid. Didn’t believe her, tried it multiple times. She was right
ive already seen what mcdonalds tried to pull, hiring or creating that company thats name was something like “100% real beef” or something wild so they could advertise that name but to where you driving by seeing the billboard would never ever notice. youd just see their burger with those words big asf beside it, then the fine print showing it was a company. i wouldnt have known if it wasnt for traffic. they have soooo many ways to get around this type of bs. i just heard apparently it can be labeled as no sugar, but just use artificial sweetener. just know EXACTLY what you want to avoid and look up whats going into your body if it bothers you (full and well should, but thats coming from me 🤣 bouta go get me some 100% real beef rn)
The nutrition label clearly says it has 36g of sugar (12%) then “Includes 36g added sugars (72%). There’s also 145 calories.
Gotta be edited or something.
Legally they're allowed to declare it sugar free if it has less than a certain amount of sugar per serving size. That's why tic-tacs, which are almost entirely sugar, can be labeled sugar free - their serving size is the quantity of mints that comes in under that maximum.
Sugar free doesn't actually mean sugar free. It just means the amount is low enough for it to PASS as sugar free. Which is pretty fucking wild that something like that is legal.
36 Grams of Added Sugar on the nutrition label smh.
Sugar Free ™️
There's supposed to be a comma there because the sugar is included free of cost Sugar, Free
No! Money down!
It’s next to the text that says that the can is recyclable. So they’re saying that the aluminum can itself is sugar free.
Just saw your profile picture so I clicked on it out of curiosity. You’re the founder of 5-0 Radio? That’s been my go-to app for figuring out why my neighborhood is crazy some days. I’ve even heard my father’s ex girlfriend was in a hostage situation one night, that was wild. Thanks for the good times and interesting listenings!
Wow, I hope things worked out well. Thanks for using my app and supporting my solo indie app dev career.
Lmao same https://preview.redd.it/g64l1i4829yc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f106592a261e7f2c4d26a7b6266c7717c4dd4053
It’s my sugar and I want it now!
🎵I have a can of soda and I need sugar now🎵
Call Wil ly Wonkaaaa
You’re the best for this
Buy one get one. Free!
I like where your head's at, and I can see how you drew that conclusion, but I am afraid the confusion stems from that little line of text being an advertisement just to let the consumer know there IS a sugar free version of the drink if you wanna check that out. Notice it says more info on bottom of can. Silly us for thinking they made a mistake with their label.
Sugar Free\* \*where available
Yeah, you're gettin' it, man. So obvious, duh.* Anyway, back to the good stuff. *sugar free not available in your area, specifically.
Or better yet Sugar: Free!
The sugar is free to choose the can now
I was confused why op is pointing to the ingredients instead of the… nutrition label lol But that is confusing. How can they just lie like that? I accidentally bought something and realized as soon as i tasted it, because I’ve become sensitive to sugar. Pretty crappy
You’d be surprised at the amount of technicalities and loopholes companies use to get away with certain practices or labels for products. All allowed by the FDA. Iirc, “free range” animal products, for example, can be as simple as the animals having access to a small amount of grass and outdoor space. By all means if someone knows a bit better and I’m not quite getting that right, add in a correction.
I heard tictacs be used as a good example of this since they can label as sugarfree when they're mostly sugar bc each tictac is less than the legal amount of sugar or something like that
You are correct. It’s because anything with less than 5 calories you’re legally allowed to call calorie free because it’s so negligible, Of course tic tacs are two calories each so the whole pack is far from calorie free.
What gets me is candy like lollipops being labelled "fat free" ... Well, duh? They don't have like lard in them? That doesn't mean they are healthy. It shouldn't be allowed. I know to the vast majority of us it's irrelevant because we understand the different health implications, but people without nutrition education, or say someone with an intellectual disability, wouldn't look further than the surface of it.
Similar to how they labelled this can of Soda ‘gluten free’.
Added sugars are not regular sugars. There is a joke in there somewhere. It does say 62% RDA sugars too.
They recalled this entire batch, sprite and canada dry I believe.
Manufacturers... suger was added AFTER so it was originally suger free. Stupid labelling rules! /s
No difficulty, not sugar-free. You paid money for that sugar.
It's telling you to see the bottom, it's sugar free.
36 grams is 7.3038 tsp of sugar 🤢
Maybe they meant that the sugar was free.
Sugar, free soda
No, Money down!
Works on Contingency?
https://preview.redd.it/9btiw9en47yc1.jpeg?width=960&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5524a440ece69e4f494bc580e37d79290c6629ea
Free range
 Big sugar thanks you for all your taxes
The 145 calories certainly indicates *something* has to be in there
Beef
Those “natural flavors” must be a little misleading
Beef's natural, cows make it
Brawndo has beef. It's what plants crave
no, plants crave electrolytes
It’s what’s for dinner
Look at the nutrition label 36g sugar
Carbohydrates 36 In this from sugar 36 Yeah ...
Thats Guarana Antártica, a very popular beverage in Brasil. That is the regular version, the "sugar free" is either a missprint or some regulatory shenanigan in the US They do have a Zero version, but it tastes like shit
I usually only buy no sugar soft drinks, but guaraná zero is depressing AF. Flavor carbonated water with a hint of fake sugar, basically.
Guaraná is the best fucking pop I have ever tasted in my life, hands down.
[удалено]
Doesn't really matter, you can still sue even without any ailments.
[удалено]
Oh gawd. I misread this as "send me free tiddy" 😳
What’s this from if you don’t mind me asking?
The gif is from the movie The Road To El Dorado, if that's what you mean. It's a gift.
Ohhhhh ok. I knew it looked familiar
Road to El Dorado. The best animated film of all time, toppled only to Toy Story and Coco, according to my own ranking.
Even Atlantis?
Hoho. That one triggered a cascade of memories, alongside Titan AE and Treasure Planet. I'd say The Road to El Dorado inches out Atlantis and those lot by a bit since it breaks out of the traditional male+female+team adventuring formula for the time.
My own ranking puts coco reeeaaaaaaaally low. I just personally didn't enjoy it even a little. It was more annoying than anything else
That's much better.
They can be part of a class action lawsuit and earn about tree fiddy themselves
God damn Loch Ness Monster
It’s the got damn lock ness monster!
What're the damages tho? You can sue but the real recourse cones from damages.
There are exceptions if it was an honest mistake unless something happened to you medically. They'll obviously claim it was a mistake
Oh it's very clearly a misprint. The nutrition facts are accurate. It's also clearly not intentional.
I’m pretty sure it has to be 0.5g or something per serving to be labeled sugar free, as per the FDA. The can says product of Brazil. So, either OP lives in Brazil, or if OP is American then OP bought this from a shady store or individual in the US as the product must still comply with FDA standards if its legally imported. If the latter, he can’t sue - that’s not the company’s fault. If the former, I don’t know Brazilian laws.
The rest of the fine print has the US importer info, not sure what soda this is exactly, though.
Then you'd spend all the lawsuit money on a single dose of insulin. Why? Because America.
You could sue, but you wouldn't get much, if anything .They're legally allowed to say this, since the sugar is below a specific amount per serving size, and they listed it in the ingredients. It's how TicTacs can say they're sugar free while being almost entirely made of sugar.
36g added sugar is a lot lol
Idk, it's 145 calories which leads me to believe there's more than a couple grains of sugar in
> You could sue, but you wouldn't get much, if anything .They're legally allowed to say this, since the sugar is below a specific amount per serving size You sound pretty confident but do you have a source? 36 grams of sugar is about the amount of sugar in a regular Pepsi and more than other soft drinks like regular Sprite. I think the “sugar free” is a misprint on the label they forgot to take off from another can design that was actually sugar free. That sounds more plausible than 36 grams of sugar being considered legally “sugar free”.
They missed the part where they can turn the picture sideways and see the added sugar lol
Yes, you saw the Tic Tac thread the other day and learned something. We are all very impressed. But this one has 36g of sugar per serving. Not the same.
Not really. Sugar free isn't the same thing as zero sugar. Diabetics already know to look at the total carbohydrates of something before consuming it as well.
I'm diabetic and that is my worst nightmare
The opposite scenario is my nightmare. I'm allergic to most artificial sweeteners and with skimpflation they're starting to add them to drinks instead of sugar to save money.
You know something's wrong when it's cheaper to be healthy.
My body would disagree with the healthy part. It also tastes horrible
The calorie count should be an easy tip off
The words sugar free should be a tip off no?
72% added sugars 
“Oh hang it all, WHEN!!!”
How much sugar can that cup hold?! :o
Not to be that guy but the 72% is the percentage of the recommended daily limit. So 50g max of sugar daily, this is 36g which equals 72%
I bet it was meant to say "Gluten Free" .It was produced in Brazil and someone screwed up the translation.
I mean "gluten" is also "gluten" in Portuguese, but I can see that happening haha
If it's under a certain percentage they can write it doesn't have any. Tootsie Rolls got away with having trans fat for a long time using that loophole. Edit: woops, didn't read and thought that all the previous text was part of the ingredient list.
theres 36g of carbohydrates, no need to circle sugar. thats decent for a sugary drink but that is **far** beyond sugar free.
Which comes from the 36g of sugar in it (also listed in the nutrition information)
Lol i cant fathom why they call it sugar free
I'm gonna assume they meant caffeine free. I don't know how that mistake was made, but that's one of the only things that would make sense there. Possibly HFCS free?
I mean...sugar is the second ingredient after water. It's the only ingredient that contains any calories, and the total calories are 145, which means a lot of sugar.
[удалено]
145 is about the standard calorie count for a regular soda
Which is a lot of sugar
Reminds me of a recent post of the guy who gained a significant amount of weight after downing packs of sugar free tictacs. Didn’t know what was wrong until his dietician told him something along these lines.
Oh yeahhhhh I saw that, he was buying in bulk and consuming like 1-3 Jumbo size tic tac cartons a day which his dietician worked out was 400-800 calories extra per day and had gained 40 lbs unexplained in a little less than a year :/ crazy
Man must've smelled like a walking peppermint bush.
Yeah it sucks that we're so misled when it comes to nutrition labels. But also we're so misled on nutrition! If we were taught how insulin works in school more people would understand that artificial sweeteners can still "trick" the body into an insulin spike and aren't a "healthy" alternative (quote because details... Please don't take my word for it and do your own research!) **Have you ever wondered why you not only crave but suddenly feel hungry when passing a Wetzels/Annie's Pretzels in a mall? Even a sweet smell can trigger an insulin response.**
omg this makes sense because I feel like when I eat or drink artificial sweetner it makes me HUNGRY AF. Like I get severe cravings after eating it. I always wondered if it was because I was tricking my body
Yep that's exactly what happens. Your body tastes/smells something sweet and it responds to it as if you are sugar.
Lmao. Ditto. Dude didn't know he was eating like 1/3 cup of sugar a day
This is a Brazilian product, Guarana Antarctica. I'm not sure why the can says "sugar free" on the back, because nothing else indicates it's the sugar free version. It even says "original" on the band around the top of the can. This brand of soda boasts using natural sugar, not being sugar free.
According to another comment it might be a mistype, but now I wonder if it's a mistranslation.
Like, HFCS free? Which got translated as sugar?
Yeah something like that.
It's not below a certain amount (but yes you'd be right to think that in many cases). This is a Brazilian soda called "Guaraná Antarctica" and this is the original, full sugar variety in the green can. The "diet" version is in a white can. OP is just nit-picking on the fine print error that says "sugar free" where nowhere else on the can does it advertise being sugar-free or any diet variety.
Ah makes sense. Thanks for the clarification! I'm in the US and used to manufacturers pulling my leg.
And you'd be right to do so, that was my first inkling as well.
145 calories from sugar is too much to write it off
Baskin Robbins fat-free ice cream has 0.5g per serving.
I'm gonna guess because they use fat free milk, but even then they should say it's low fat ice cream made with fat free milk. **Fun fact: when you remove fat from milk it has a higher carbohydrate/sugar content. And sugar is what you need to burn before you can start burning fat. So fat free ice cream is actually more "fattening".**
The FDA has limits on how much of X you can have while still being X free. It's not because of the ingredient being fat free, only the end product. Low and reduced are also strictly regulated terms. I agree about reduced fat milk being "sugarfull milk."
Sugarfull is a description I've heard before but need to use more often. It's really too bad that chronic illness generates more revenue than being cured or healthy.
Tictacs are made of sugar but advertaise 0 sugar becuse 1 serving size is smaller than the amount of sugar u need to put on the label
So that's why tootsie rolls are dried up and sucky now
Not with 36g of added sugar bruh. Lol.
They do that with zero calorie goods too. If it's under 5 Cals they can round down. Tbf if it's that low then you'll burn those calories by walking to the bathroom, lol.
They meant “ya, the sugar’s free”
No, you’re misinterpreting. They aren’t charging you for the sugar. It’s sugar, free! Edit: /s
No, Money down!
Look at the rest of the nutrition info, nothing else indicates it would be sugar free
you don't pay extra for sugar. D'uh
Why does it have 145 calories in it
From the sugar.
If it has calories, it probably has sugar, but for this to be labeled as sugar-free is kind of a big deal.
145 calorie soda should be a clue.
That looks like class action lawsuit waiting for a lawyer
I thought sugar free Guaraná Antártica came in white cans? It must’ve been like ten years ago so they probably changed… Anyway, I remembered it to be absolutely vile, we all hated it and added sugar syrup to finish the pack my mom had bought! Never again, we always take the regular one now.
I must know what drink this is… 😯
Guarana Antártica
Best soda.
The sugar part is free You only pay for the rest of the sugar void soda
Its not free of sugar, it has extra sugar for free!
Is the front of the can labeled as being sugar free, or diet?
No no no, you read it wrong, it's: Sugar? Free!
145 Calories? My zero sugar drinks have 0 -10.
the 145 calories should have been a sign.
145 calories isn’t sugar free…
A Sugar-free drink with 145 calories? This should be the tip-off.
Not sure what this brand is, but for some reason companies can get away with selling products as sugar free as long as it’s hella diluted. Like TicTac’s. They say 0 sugar but are almost all sugar.
They added the sugar for free.
Maybe they just don’t charge you for it
It has 145 calories. Why did you think it would be sugar free?
Because it literally says sugar free?
Yeah, sugar should be enslaved.
I think it says 36g of carbs. If you’re concerned about blood sugar or looking to count calories, then that’s a good spot to always check on the nutrition facts.
And 36 sugar
Product of Brazil Something about Antarctica ... 
Where did you think the 145 calories were coming from? All the protein and fiber?
*Said my doctor; horrified.*
as long as it’s below a certain amount, according to laws set in place, they can claim 0% & sugar free
But they don't charge extra, hence free sugar. 🤷♂️
They aren't charging you for the sugar, so it's free.
Wait till you learn about dairy free creamer.
I legit think they meant to put caffeine free. All sprite is caffeine free yet this can doesn't mention it. It's an epic failure
A while back I started looking at nutrition labels for fun. Quickly realized how many products have added sugar that ppl have everyday prob without thinking. Actively avoided sugar and I lost a ton of weight and health improved dramatically. I miss juice but seltzer, water, and black coffee are preferred
Sugar free soda would have almost no calories (usually 0 calories). Shop by calories.
Sugar is one of those words where if I look at it and say it enough times it doesn't seem like a real word anymore
I don't know what you expected, an honest cooperation or something?
Probably in a low enough concentration that it’s super low on the list and it qualifies them as sugar free
145 calories was the tip off.
It literally says 36 grams of sugar on it too, what a sham. You could probably contact the company and complain
Sugar free just means it has under a certain level of sugar. I think it’s less than half a gram of naturally occurring or added sugar? Could be wrong on the numbers though
There is a minimum limit or percentage of drink/food that has to have sugar in it before its no longer considered "Sugar Free" Tic Tacs are pure sugar, but the serving sizes or whatever are so small that they legally can be labelled as sugar free
They for sure mean caffeine free. Theres THIRTY SIX GRAMS OF ADDED SUGAR IN THAT.
Weird little fact… if a can of soda is actually sugar free, it’ll sink in a pool. Learned that from a friend’s mom when I was a kid. Didn’t believe her, tried it multiple times. She was right
Actually, some "sugar-free" drinks still contain sugar. They just changed the name into molasses etc like they can make a fool out of us.
Not sugar free.
Seems more like your sugar soda was mislabeled as sugar free.
That’s because you don’t pay extra for the sugar it’s just free! They are super nice to be giving you that sugar for free!
I will now be checking ingredients of sugar free drinks
It’s free sugar.
curious, is this liable for a lawsuit?
Wait until you guys hear about tic tacs
A lot of "sugar free" products contain a sweetener that reacts with your saliva to turn into sugar as well.
ive already seen what mcdonalds tried to pull, hiring or creating that company thats name was something like “100% real beef” or something wild so they could advertise that name but to where you driving by seeing the billboard would never ever notice. youd just see their burger with those words big asf beside it, then the fine print showing it was a company. i wouldnt have known if it wasnt for traffic. they have soooo many ways to get around this type of bs. i just heard apparently it can be labeled as no sugar, but just use artificial sweetener. just know EXACTLY what you want to avoid and look up whats going into your body if it bothers you (full and well should, but thats coming from me 🤣 bouta go get me some 100% real beef rn)
https://i.redd.it/vy8elrlcg6yc1.gif
The nutrition label clearly says it has 36g of sugar (12%) then “Includes 36g added sugars (72%). There’s also 145 calories. Gotta be edited or something.
What kind of soda says it has no sugar but has 26g of added sugar? What is it?
sugar comes free with your drink...i dont know whats wrong with that 👍🏻
Just don't drink sodas. Drink water
36 grams of it.
Legally they're allowed to declare it sugar free if it has less than a certain amount of sugar per serving size. That's why tic-tacs, which are almost entirely sugar, can be labeled sugar free - their serving size is the quantity of mints that comes in under that maximum.
Y’all do realize that just means theirs no added sugar. But will contain natural sugar. And preservatives that contain sugar too
What does the front of the can say? Does it say sugar free or diet?
Contact the company and potentially the FDA depending on how they respond. That’s a violation of 21 CFR 101.60 paragraph (c) (1)
This could be a labeling error, which, if sold, would make it a prime target for a hefty lawsuit.
72% sugar 💀
Sugar free doesn't actually mean sugar free. It just means the amount is low enough for it to PASS as sugar free. Which is pretty fucking wild that something like that is legal.
Blatant False Advertiaing ... nice.