That's just as bad for your teeth.
MMM, sugary acid.
( Mu Dinofiddler, Tue 19 May 2009, 13:59, archived)

yeah but it's not as bad for everything else.
anyway it probably isn't. phosphoric acid is stronger than citric acid.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:02, archived)

it's not even just the strength
citric acid is pretty useless at dissolving minerals. Being organic and that. So does more or less bugger all to teeth.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:05, archived)

No.
Citric acid is the most erosive acid found in soft drinks and is the predominant acid in non-cola drinks
( Mu Dinofiddler, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:09, archived)

"The erosive potential of colas is 10 times that of fruit juices in just the first three minutes of drinking, a study last year showed"
it seems to contradict itself.
( Moon Girl Technologies horrendous beanbag, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:16, archived)

Yeah, I just actually read the thing after ctrl f-ing for citric acid.

( Mu Dinofiddler, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:19, archived)

I think it's trying to slate non-cola fizzy drinks -
sprite and that kind of thing that don't contain phosphoric acid but do have citric acid added as a flavour enhancer - for being bad for teeth. I don't think it's suggesting natural fruit juices are bad for teeth. But they've got confused with the scientific reasoning behind the actual results and applied their own primary school chemistry logic
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:28, archived)

that's the press completely misunderstading the scientific data
I'd suggest reading the original paper.

that "citric acid" statement is based on pH, not the power to erode enamel. If you notice, they point out that cola removes about 5% of enamel wheras other drinks were closer to 1.5%

ie, less erosive. Shit journalism. Citric acid may well have a lower pH than phosphoric acid. That makes fuck all difference to what happens to calcium salts (the most important bit of enamel) upon exposure.

Give I use phosphoric acid to strip limescale (calcium salt) from the inside of stainless steel fermenters, I think it's probably more harmful to teeth than a bit of orange juice, really.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:17, archived)

it's not, really. At all in fact.
it's the type of acid that's the issue.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:03, archived)

Acid is acid. The pH is the issue.

( Mu Dinofiddler, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:04, archived)

no it's not.
organic vs mineral, weak vs strong acids. And even then, mechanisms of attack matter.

HF, HCL and H2SO4 all have effectively the same pH at similar N values.

only one out of the three would I be comfortable having on my hand. H2S04 is an excellent reducer, so will take organic stuff back to carbon in seconds. HF on the other hand will go through glass but will leave some organic stuff untouched, which is why you can keep it in plastic bottles.

horses for courses, citric acid will barely touch tooth enamel, phosphoric will strip it pretty quickly.
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:10, archived)

See above.

( Mu Dinofiddler, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:11, archived)

I have done.
it's rubbish. Being on the internet doesn't make it true. Some idiot journalist has misunderstood a peice of scientific research and therefore misrepresented the results. And as MGT points out, even a non-scientist can see the article contradicts itself several times , it's obviously retard journalism for the ADHD "OMG like EVERYTHING causes cancer" generation
( the mighty badger Aphrodite, on a bar stool, by your side, Tue 19 May 2009, 14:21, archived)