this post was submitted on 26 Aug 2026
318 points (96.0% liked)

Not The Onion

22327 readers
1732 users here now

Welcome

We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!

The Rules

Posts must be:

  1. Links to news stories from...
  2. ...credible sources, with...
  3. ...their original headlines, that...
  4. ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”

Please also avoid duplicates.

Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, ableist, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.

And that’s basically it!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] peacepath@lemmy.world 14 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

It is a good way to tax the poors while pretending it is ethical and for public health… May the poors would be healthier if they have less money?

[–] thisNotMyName@lemmy.world 3 points 8 hours ago

Starved poors mean less poors so everyone will be richer. Easy how that works isn't it?

[–] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.today 19 points 13 hours ago

"But there isn't even sugar in this!"

"Yeah, but you still suck, so you're paying anyway."

[–] linsenchip@piefed.zip 70 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

The minister of finance clarified that the tax will not apply to sugar free drinks

https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/zuckersteuer-172.html

[–] Sir_Premiumhengst@lemmy.world 18 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

O lol that's fairly recent tho. Yesterday they were all saying: hurr durr the drinking of sweet tasting things should be curbed and I almost punched the narrator via TCP/IP

[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 5 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I would definitely support it if somebody wants to tax stevia.

[–] quick_snail@feddit.nl 6 points 14 hours ago (2 children)
[–] lukaro@lemmy.zip 13 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Nothing other than the aftertaste.

[–] mad_kamikaze_man@feddit.org 4 points 11 hours ago

Funny Thing ist the Aftertaste comes from the Processing that ist mandated by law and has been lobbied in by big sugar

[–] BrickEater@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

Its fucking disgusting tasting.

[–] BrickEater@lemmy.world -2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

TBH good, drink some water you'll be healthier. And FUCK artificial sweeteners that shit is straight chemical cancer. I fucking hate when I get Stevia or Splenda or Sucralose etc, they all taste like chemical garbage.

[–] A_Chilean_Cyborg@feddit.cl 1 points 51 minutes ago

Sweeteners like aspartame have been intensely researched because the health scare that used to be around it, Is still considered totally safe so "Straight chemical cancer" is false, it is not.

Probably there are way worse thinks that we don't know around somewhere that affect us way worse than diet cola lol.

[–] phx@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago (1 children)

Straight up Stevia isn't too bad. It comes from the leaves of a plant and if anything is often sweeter tasting per volume than sugar. That doesn't mean people should be drinking soft drinks with it in great volume versus water, but it's an acceptable substitute IMO to sugar in coffee or the occasional drink and still better than cane sugar. Soft drinks contain plenty of other shit that's not particularly good for you in addition to the sweeteners too.

Sucralose is nasty stuff, and Splenda is just a brand, with their "sweetener" containing a bit of Sucralose in their chemical cocktail "sugar substitute" in addition to hefty doses of dextrose/maltodexrin as bulking agents.

[–] starelfsc2@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9891650/

I'm not sure if this includes Stevia but artificial sweeteners have some pretty bad long term effects

load more comments
view more: next ›