Sugary Drinks Vs Drinking Water Consumption Trends is a critical aspect of modern water treatment. AMPAC USA provides industry-leading solutions that ensure safe, clean water for residential, commercial, and industrial applications. Our systems are engineered for maximum contaminant removal and long-term reliability.
- 1MS-Nutrition, 27 bld Jean Moulin, Faculté de Médecine la Timone, Laboratoire C2VN, Marseille, France
- 2PepsiCo Inc., Purchase, NY, United States
- 3Center for Public Health Nutrition, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, United States
Background: Choosing water in place of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) can reduce added sugars while maintaining adequate hydration. The present goal was to examine 2011–16 time trends in SSB vs. water consumption across US population subgroups.
Methods: Dietary intake data for 22,716 persons aged >4 years came from two 24-h dietary recalls in successive cycles of the National Health and Examination Survey (NHANES 2011–16). Water intakes (in mL/d) from plain water (tap and bottled) and from beverages (SSB and not-SSB) were the principal outcome variables. Intakes were analyzed by age group, income to poverty ratio (IPR), and race/ethnicity. Time trends by demographics were also examined.
Results: SSB and water intakes followed distinct social gradients. Most SSB was consumed by Non-Hispanic Black and lower-income groups. Most tap water was consumed by Non-Hispanic White and higher-income groups. During 2011–16, water from SSB declined from 322 to 262 mL/d (p < 0.005), whereas plain water increased (1,011–1,144 mL/d) (p < 0.05). Groups aged <30 years reduced SSB consumption (p < 0.0001) but it was groups aged >30 years that increased drinking water (p < 0.001). Non-Hispanic White groups reduced SSB and increased tap water consumption. Non-Hispanic Black and lower income groups reduced SSB and increased bottled water, not tap.
Conclusion: The opposing time trends in SSB and water consumption were not uniform across age groups or sociodemographic strata. Only the non-Hispanic White population reduced SSB and showed a corresponding increase in tap water. Lower-income and minority groups consumed relatively little plain drinking water from the tap.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnut.2020.587123/full
The post Opposing Consumption Trends for Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Plain Drinking Water: Analyses of NHANES 2011–16 Data appeared first on Facts About Water.
Source: Water Feed
What flow rates are available for emergency water treatment?
AMPAC USA's emergency systems range from 1,500 GPD portable units to 50,000+ GPD trailer-mounted systems. Military-specification units are available for forward operating base deployment, producing potable water meeting EPA and WHO drinking water standards from virtually any source.
Are emergency RO systems suitable for disaster relief operations?
Yes. AMPAC USA's emergency systems are used by FEMA, the U.S. military, and international NGOs for disaster relief. They treat flood water, contaminated groundwater, and brackish sources, removing bacteria, viruses, and chemical contaminants to produce safe drinking water on-site.
What power sources can emergency water purification systems use?
AMPAC USA's emergency systems can run on generator power (120/240V or 480V 3-phase), solar panels with battery backup, or vehicle power take-off (PTO). Low-power models consume as little as 0.5 kW, making them viable for off-grid deployment.
How durable are military-grade water purification systems?
AMPAC USA's military systems are built to MIL-SPEC standards with stainless steel frames, powder-coated components, and UV-resistant materials. They are designed to operate in temperatures from -20°F to 120°F and are vibration-tested for transport in military vehicles.


Colin D. Rehm2,