Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: EricT.

The first statement was an opinion, not right or wrong.

Just checked Sam Adams, for example, on their website, 175 calories/12 oz.

That is 25 more than a coke.


39 posted on 06/30/2013 1:59:08 PM PDT by Kenny500c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]


To: Kenny500c
Just checked Sam Adams, for example, on their website, 175 calories/12 oz. That is 25 more than a coke.

Kind of a silly comparison. Most beers have just four ingredients: Barley, hops, yeast and water. Can't get much more pure than that. Soda pop has enough chemicals to eat through rust and is just plain toxic to the body. I've never had soda pop in the house and told my kids I'd rather have them crack a can of beer then a can of soda pop.

41 posted on 06/30/2013 2:10:42 PM PDT by SamAdams76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

To: Kenny500c

I was only half joking on the Budweiser comment. It’s actually not a bad beer at all, and I have yet to turn one down when offered to me. I’ve certainly had my share of Bud over the years. I guess just got bored with it and most other mega-brews.

Calories are not a measure of sugar. Over 2/3 of calories in beer are from alcohol and the other 1/3 is from unfermented carbohydrates, which is where most of the flavor comes from. Last time I checked, Coke has a ton of sugar, but no alcohol. Sam Adams has over 5% alcohol and a lot of malted grain extracts. Budweiser uses rice to save on barley malt, but rice adds darn little to the flavor party.


62 posted on 06/30/2013 4:52:24 PM PDT by EricT. (This post has been recorded and cataloged for your security.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson