Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!hropus!jin
From: jin@hropus.UUCP (Jerry Natowitz)
Newsgroups: net.misc
Subject: Re: Coke, classic coke and new coke
Message-ID: <630@hropus.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 17-Aug-86 18:01:17 EDT
Article-I.D.: hropus.630
Posted: Sun Aug 17 18:01:17 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 19-Aug-86 02:46:23 EDT
References: <332@encore.UUCP>
Organization: Bell Labs, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 30

> A friend of mine has an interesting theory why Coca-cola changed the formula.
> We all know that cocaine was used in the original formula and was taken out
> around the turn of the century (I don't know the accurate date).  Coca-cola
> may have added some other ingredient to retain the 'bite', flavor or
> pick-me-up qualities that the cocaine provided.  Since Coca-cola will not
> reveal their 'secret' recipe it is hard to tell.  But what if this were so
> and Coca-cola recently discovered some negative, bad or harmful aspects of
> this ingredient and was forced or compelled to change the formula.  The best
> way to do this would be come up with a horrible formula and stop producing
> the good stuff.  Then wait long enough so that the real coke is off all
> the supermarket shelves and the reserve many people will have built up is
> depleted.  Then back down under public pressure and come out with classic.
> This way most people will not notice the difference from coke and classic
> since the comparison will be from new coke (most recent drinking experiences)
> and classic.

One of the flavor ingediants in coke is decocainized coca leaf
extract.  I have no idea what it tastes like but with the very limited
medical uses of cocaine I suppose that Coca-Cola's demand for coca leaves
was greater than the pharaceutical demand, hence extra cocaine base.
Perhaps a request from the powers that be persuaded Coca-Cola to change
their formula.

Me, I prefer seltzer.
-- 
Jerry Natowitz
Bell Labs HR 2A-214
201-615-5178 (no CORNET)
ihnp4!houxm!hropus!jin
or ihnp4!opus!jin