Sugar free Calpol reduced to 87p in Co-op
843°Expired

Sugar free Calpol reduced to 87p in Co-op

41
Found 18th Oct 2016Made hot 18th Oct 2016
My Husband was just in the Co-op and said he had picked up some Calpol (sugar free) as it was only 87p. This was a bigger Co-op and not sure if all stores but it had an actual sign for it so quite possibly so. Definitely worth checking.

41 Comments

Removing sugar from a teaspoon's worth of solution. Cos that's not reached schizophrenic levels of sugar fear at all, has it.....

has removing the sugar ruined the taste? I remember loving this stuff as a child

Original Poster

michaeljb

has removing the sugar ruined the taste? I remember loving this stuff as … has removing the sugar ruined the taste? I remember loving this stuff as a child


It doesn't taste the same as the sugar containing one. I know this because one of my children tells me it is different although she of course doesn't know why! Most shops, if they are going to stock one though, it always seems to be the sugar free one. Of course bigger shops normally stock both!
Edited by: "mintsauce22" 18th Oct 2016

Funny how some parents would rather give distilled petrol to their kids than sugar. Common sweeteners such as saccharin are petroleum-based compounds. This Calpol includes maltitol and sorbitol, the latter being made from corn syrup so not quite as bad as Saccharin.

A great deal of evidence suggests that due to the fact that the body does not receive the expected energy burst from something that is sweet you still crave more food, negating the whole point of a sweetener (to reduce calorie intake). There is also some suggestion that chemical sweeteners may harm the natural bacteria balance in the gut.

Taking sugar out of something that is meant to be used on an occasional as needed basis just seems ridiculous to me. If you don't want your child to get fat then consider what they are eating on a daily basis, ration their iPad usage and get them to go outdoors or to sports centre and do something that involves moving more than a finger.

Edited by: "Going_Digital" 18th Oct 2016

This is store specific, these kinds of labels are centrally generated for clearance for one store, it's extremely hit and miss to find the same reduction in more stores.

Kid hates this, cold.

A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down...

Who the hell has EVER got fat on Calpol.

[img]encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRgpmQgnuBgZmcQy5kvZJemML6Jnfvhv4mqgCrOb9_rgM4EfAcW[/img]
Heat for the deal but I don't get it Carpol doesn't make you fat....

Has anybody found this in another store? We're several miles from a Co-op but I can only take liquid meds - will make the trek if not store specific!

Going_Digital

Funny how some parents would rather give distilled petrol to their kids … Funny how some parents would rather give distilled petrol to their kids than sugar. Common sweeteners such as saccharin are petroleum-based compounds. This Calpol includes maltitol and sorbitol, the latter being made from corn syrup so not quite as bad as Saccharin.A great deal of evidence suggests that due to the fact that the body does not receive the expected energy burst from something that is sweet you still crave more food, negating the whole point of a sweetener (to reduce calorie intake). There is also some suggestion that chemical sweeteners may harm the natural bacteria balance in the gut.Taking sugar out of something that is meant to be used on an occasional as needed basis just seems ridiculous to me. If you don't want your child to get fat then consider what they are eating on a daily basis, ration their iPad usage and get them to go outdoors or to sports centre and do something that involves moving more than a finger.



Oh come on now, all that silly stuff about Aspartame being bad is just silly talk and crackpot conspiracy.

Yours sincerely,

NutraSweet (TM)

craigfoley

Kid hates this, cold.



If this is what they had from the beginning they would not know any better.
They may not like it as they may have been fed the sugar version before.
This is the error. Medicines should not be tasty anyway!

Heat added good price

It's probably worth remembering that there are children who need to avoid sugar for medical reasons, although they're probably a small minority. Heat added for this, it's cheaper than generic versions of paracetamol suspension that are available, which is something else to remember - generic paracetamol suspensions from pharmacies or supermarkets are almost always considerably cheaper than Calpol. Sure, if junior has been raised on Calpol, he might not be happy about switching to a different flavour, but if they're not fussy then it will do the job just as well.

The price is good but nowhere does it even mention which store this is at. so it is not really a deal. I imagine it will be 1 store only or tops 5 stores that has this deal!

sopranoPhD

Has anybody found this in another store? We're several miles from a Co-op … Has anybody found this in another store? We're several miles from a Co-op but I can only take liquid meds - will make the trek if not store specific!



Hi, thought I'd reply to this as this may be helpful. Assuming you're an adult, and assuming this is the stronger 250mg per 5ml strength Calpol (for age 6+, but it's not clear from the post that it is), you'd need 4 x 5ml spoons to equate to 1 adult dose (usually 2 x 500mg tablets). This is likely to be a 100ml bottle. At 20mls per dose, you'd only get 5 doses from a bottle. And that's *if* it is the stronger version for ages 6+.

If it's the weaker version for infants (which is likely as the post doesn't state it's the SixPlus one), the strength is only 120mg per 5ml. You'd need over 8 x 5ml spoonfuls to get close to 1 adult dose (equates to 960mg, adult dose is 1000mg). So if it's the infant version, the whole bottle would only contain roughly 2 and a half adult doses (if bottle is 100ml).

If you can only take liquid medication, it could be much more practical and cost effective to buy soluble paracetamol rather than Calpol or other paracetamol liquids.

I've not looked around to compare prices, but a quick google shows Asda do a pack of 24 x 500mg soluble paracetamol for £2.90. That's 12 adult doses, with each dose costing about 24p. If you buy this Calpol at this price, again, assuming it's the stronger version but doesn't look like it) and it's a 100ml pack, each 1000mg dose (4 x 5ml) costs just over 17p, so slightly cheaper, but only contains 5 doses. If it's the infant version though, which seems more likely, it will cost about 35p per dose (of 960mg).

Long story short, if this Calpol is the infant version (120mg per 5ml) in a 100ml bottle, even at this low price it would be cheaper for you to buy soluble paracetamol 500mg tablets if you're able to take meds dissolved in water. Not only that, a pack of 24 contains 12 adult doses, whereas a bottle of this contains only approximately 2 and a half adult doses, hardly convenient.

As Calpol and similar products are rarely this cheap anyway, if I took paracetamol now and again but could only take medicine in liquid form, I'd buy soluble tablets. Cheaper, and in my opinion more pleasant than having to chug half a bottle of Calpol to get the same dose as 2 tablets dissolved in water.

Hi there - thanks for all the info! It was really interesting to read the dosage information, thank you I take painkillers a couple of times a week for chronic back pain and achalasia. Due to the A, I can't take soluble paracetamols - they always make the water fizzy, and I can't drink fizzy things! Very annoying. I didn't know that about the doses, that's interesting. I didn't know what an adult dose was - I usually take 10mg of infant's ibuprofen when I need it, as that's what it says on the box - presumably the same info applies? Is that why sometimes I have to take another dose a few hours later? I have an emergency pack of Nurofen I carry around in my handbag - it's easier putting up with the side effects of taking a tablet instead of a liquid than having the crippling pain when it strikes - presumably that is an adult dose in comparison.

This is worth thinking about, thank you! I keep wondering whether I could ask the GP for a prescription for a liquid one, as I'd be able to get more bottles on it. But haven't got around to it yet - might change now!

So... do we know where this cheap calpol is then?

Original Poster

lfd88

So... do we know where this cheap calpol is then?


Bradford.

in bradford cure for 99% illnesses is paracetamol. however due to most people plaguing Dr's surgeries with the ems result of paracetamol demand In shops are low therefore cheaper price.

my eye is sore. off to the some paracetamol.

Original Poster

vtec

in bradford cure for 99% illnesses is paracetamol. however due to most … in bradford cure for 99% illnesses is paracetamol. however due to most people plaguing Dr's surgeries with the ems result of paracetamol demand In shops are low therefore cheaper price. my eye is sore. off to the some paracetamol.


Not that any reply is needed and I hope not aimed at me, but I have certainly never got paracetamol from the Drs. Was just trying to help other people when we saw this calpol a little cheaper than normal. :-)

mintsauce22

Not that any reply is needed and I hope not aimed at me, but I have … Not that any reply is needed and I hope not aimed at me, but I have certainly never got paracetamol from the Drs. Was just trying to help other people when we saw this calpol a little cheaper than normal. :-)



I have :)​

Going_Digital

Funny how some parents would rather give distilled petrol to their kids … Funny how some parents would rather give distilled petrol to their kids than sugar. Common sweeteners such as saccharin are petroleum-based compounds. This Calpol includes maltitol and sorbitol, the latter being made from corn syrup so not quite as bad as Saccharin.A great deal of evidence suggests that due to the fact that the body does not receive the expected energy burst from something that is sweet you still crave more food, negating the whole point of a sweetener (to reduce calorie intake). There is also some suggestion that chemical sweeteners may harm the natural bacteria balance in the gut.Taking sugar out of something that is meant to be used on an occasional as needed basis just seems ridiculous to me. If you don't want your child to get fat then consider what they are eating on a daily basis, ration their iPad usage and get them to go outdoors or to sports centre and do something that involves moving more than a finger.



[citations needed]

Petroleum mostly consists of hydrocarbons, just like fats. Suggesting saccharin is bad because it comes from "distilled petrol" is similar to saying salt is bad because it contains chlorine or that eating pears are bad because they contain formaldehyde, a class 1 carcinogen. Chemistry is chemistry, the fact that saccharin is petroleum based alone doesn't make it bad, toxic etc, it's still an organic compound, one the body can't even do much with - "Saccharin is not broken down when digested. It is slowly absorbed into the system and rapidly excreted, unchanged, by the kidneys.

According to the NHS - "However, research into sweeteners and appetite stimulation is inconsistent. Also, there is little evidence from longer-term studies to show that sweeteners lead to increased energy intake and contribute to the risk of obesity. "

This systematic review strongly suggests that low calorie sweeteners, both natural and artificial, can and do help with losing and managing weight.

There was a recent thing in the media about gut bacteria and sweeteners but it was a limited study as explained here. I'm not aware of any other evidence supporting that line of thought otherwise but of course that may change in future.

It's worth mentioning that there's a significant amount of evidence linking high sugar consumption with various health problems and sweeteners can offer part of a solution in helping to reducing consumption.

Fully agree with your last paragraph.
Edited by: "yrreb88" 18th Oct 2016

Elevation

Oh come on now, all that silly stuff about Aspartame being bad is just … Oh come on now, all that silly stuff about Aspartame being bad is just silly talk and crackpot conspiracy.Yours sincerely,NutraSweet (TM)



Most of it does seem to be silly talk and conspiracy though.

yrreb88

[citations needed]The fact that saccharin is petroleum based alone … [citations needed]The fact that saccharin is petroleum based alone doesn't make it bad, toxic etc, it's still an organic compound, one the body can't even do much with.


I don't subscribe to the idea that it is bad just because it is made from petroleum. Some very helpful medicines are made from petroleum products and some fatal poisons from plant materials. However our digestive system has evolved to process sugar as something found in natural forms in most foods.
yrreb88

It's worth mentioning that there's a significant amount of evidence … It's worth mentioning that there's a significant amount of evidence linking high sugar consumption with various health problems


And there it is, the source of the problem, high sugar intake, not just sugar intake. At various points in time various foods have become the enemy. People become obsessed with removing this evil substance from their diet, when in reality unless you have a condition such as diabetes, moderate consumption of many 'harmful' things including alcohol and sugar is perfectly safe.

The main problem with all food is the amount of processing that is done to it. The more food is processed outside the stomach the quicker it is absorbed. Take something as mundane and 'healthy' as a porridge oat, it isn't stuffed full of sugar and fat but an oat from an instant cook porridge will be digested completely in 4 hours releasing all of the energy stored in it. A traditional porridge oat will however take 8 hours to digest releasing the same amount of energy over that time. How is this achieve? Simply the instant oats are steamed for 30% longer than traditional and rolled thinner, i.e it is more processed. Our digestive system has evolved to extract fats and sugars from whole foods and we get fat because we stop eating the whole food and extract the bits we like the taste of i.e sugary and fatty parts. The single best change people can make to their diet to reduce wight gain is to to eat food as close to its original form as possible where all elements such as fats sugars fibre are all held together in complex structures that need extended digestion time to break down.

Calpol has existed as sugar free for as long as I can remember (I am 20). It tastes better than the sugar-full version which is an awful Orange flavour.

Please stop getting mad abut the fact it is sugar free.

sopranoPhD

Hi there - thanks for all the info! It was really interesting to read the … Hi there - thanks for all the info! It was really interesting to read the dosage information, thank you I take painkillers a couple of times a week for chronic back pain and achalasia. Due to the A, I can't take soluble paracetamols - they always make the water fizzy, and I can't drink fizzy things! Very annoying. I didn't know that about the doses, that's interesting. I didn't know what an adult dose was - I usually take 10mg of infant's ibuprofen when I need it, as that's what it says on the box - presumably the same info applies? Is that why sometimes I have to take another dose a few hours later? I have an emergency pack of Nurofen I carry around in my handbag - it's easier putting up with the side effects of taking a tablet instead of a liquid than having the crippling pain when it strikes - presumably that is an adult dose in comparison. This is worth thinking about, thank you! I keep wondering whether I could ask the GP for a prescription for a liquid one, as I'd be able to get more bottles on it. But haven't got around to it yet - might change now!



Sorry to hear about the achalasia, it must make things tricky to say the least! Soluble / dispersible paracetamol tablets may be available in a form that means they aren't effervescent, and just break down into water gently rather than making it fizzy. Even the 'fizzy' tablets go flat fairly quickly if just left for a bit in my experience. Your pharmacist may be able to advise on the best options. I seem to remember that there used to be 'dispersible' aspirin that dissolved in water without making it fizzy, someone might be producing a paracetamol that works the same way, but I really don't know. Explain the issue to the pharmacist and as long as she or he are the friendly type and have the time, they'll see what is out there if they don't already know.

Ibuprofen - I think you may have missed a zero off the strength you said you take, as far as I'm aware the strength of the liquid is usually 100mg per 5 ml dose, or 200mg is also available I believe. 10mg would have very little effect, if any. Standard dose for people 12 and over is 200mg to 400mg, up to 3 times a day. So even taking 1 dose of 100mg is lower that most adults would take for a headache, and I'm surprised if you feel any benefit from it. I think ibuprofen is a bit less of an issue for you than the paracetamol though, as you won't need to glug down quite as much to reach the adult dosage.

It might be worth discussing both medicines with your GP. If you can only take them in liquid form, they may be able to write you a prescription for either several bottles at once, or for 1 litre bottles of the stuff if they still make them in that size. Pharmacies used to keep big bottles in stock which they'd then pour out into a bottle and dispense. When i worked in a pharmacy many moons ago, we frequently dispensed prescriptions for large bottles of paracetamol suspension in particular. If you need to pay for your prescriptions, it might be worth asking the GP to prescribe several bottles each time. You will still only be charged for each item on the prescription, rather than paying a fee for each bottle / pack, which should mean it's cheaper for you than buying retail. 5 bottles or 10 bottles of paracetamol liquid, it doesn't matter, you still pay 1 prescription charge. If there's paracetamol and ibuprofen on the prescription, you'd pay 2 charges, one for each drug. I'd certainly say it's worth asking your pharmacist what options might be open to you, they may well suggest something that the GP wouldn't think of doing unless requested, and telling the GP you've discussed it with your pharmacist could be helpful.

If you're just going to stick with buying meds retail though rather than asking for prescriptions, the generic brands are usually cheaper and just as effective...so I wouldn't go for Calpol, but another brand of paracetamol liquid. I'd do likewise with ibuprofen, I wouldn't buy Nurofen if cheaper generic versions are available. There's no shame in asking a shop or pharmacy if they sell a cheaper generic version of the medicine you want, and that applies to all of them. I don't buy Sudafed for a cold any more as places sell cheaper versions of the same medicine. Compare the cost of Nurofen with the cost of Ibuprofen at the supermarket or Wilkinsons and you'll see a big difference. And if you're unclear about the right dosage for an adult of a children's product, just discuss with the pharmacist. Many of them enjoy the opportunity to give out advice,as it breaks up the monotony of checking prescriptions that the dispensers have put together before they're handed over to the patient! I should add a disclaimer that I'm not a doctor or a pharmacist, I worked in a pharmacy a long time ago and studied pharmaceutical science, before moving into medical sales for several years. Please don't take this is official medical advice, I'm not qualified to give that! Always ask the doctor and pharmacist what dose you should take if you're buying medicines that are essentially for children, as the directions on the box / enclosed leaflet will probably only refer to dosage levels for children, which in many cases are lower than for adults, so you may not feel much of a benefit if you follow the directions for kids. Final disclaimer - I'm not a doctor or pharmacist, so don't take my word on any of this. By all means bring it up with the GP and / or pharmacist for clarification and to explore other options. All the best!

Elevation

Removing sugar from a teaspoon's worth of solution. Cos that's not … Removing sugar from a teaspoon's worth of solution. Cos that's not reached schizophrenic levels of sugar fear at all, has it.....



​so true, not to mention the fact that sweeteners aren't great for you either. why on earth replace something natural with artificial rubbish.

turbo_c

​so true, not to mention the fact that sweeteners aren't great for you e … ​so true, not to mention the fact that sweeteners aren't great for you either. why on earth replace something natural with artificial rubbish.



Hope you don't play console games, it's not natural, go outside and play!

My 8 year old is a type 1 diabetic. He has to have sugar free. Ignorance is bliss for some!

Heat added.
some idiot comments on this thread, obviously non parents.
The sugar is removed to protect small teeth, not to satisfy a need to reduce calories.
SMH.

Will check for this thx

I believe the reason for this being sugar-free is to protect teeth rather then dietary reasons, calpol is generally most used by teething children, often before they start brushing with toothpaste. All you people that HAVE to be moaning about something need to get a life.

Talking about getting them to a sports centre or off the ipad? year 6 month old babies really need a gym membership instead of sugar-free calpol.....

I've only ever seen the sugar free version. I assumed it was to protect teeth, especially as a child feeling unwell is unlikely to go and clean their teeth after taking medicine. Thanks for the post and don't let all the negative comments stop you from posting again.

So has it been found anywhere else?

yrreb88

Most of it does seem to be silly talk and conspiracy though.



Maybe so, but a lot of Supermarkets as well as brands have removed it from their products and are now using Sucralose instead.
Edited by: "jimbo23" 20th Oct 2016

jimbo23

Maybe so, but a lot of Supermarkets as well as brands have removed it … Maybe so, but a lot of Supermarkets as well as brands have removed it from their products and are now using Sucralose instead.


If anything, because both are artificial sweeteners anyway, I suspect costs/profit margins factor are the reason, not an admittance or proof it's bad or should be removed from sale etc. Pepsi recently removed aspartame from their Diet version in the USA because they thought that's what their customers wanted as sales were dropping. According to their CEO:

"“If you go and poll consumers today and read all the social media reports, there’s still trepidation about aspartame,” said Nooyi. “There’s no scientific reason for that, but people are somehow worried about aspartame.” - I blame the internet.

However sales continued to drop even quicker so they soon reversed the decision and and brought back the "Classic" Diet Pepsi so they can satisfy more customers.

turbo_c

​so true, not to mention the fact that sweeteners aren't great for you e … ​so true, not to mention the fact that sweeteners aren't great for you either. why on earth replace something natural with artificial rubbish.



Tobacco, formaldehyde and sunlight are all natural. Natural carcinogens too.

Sweeteners aren't exactly harmful either and can provide benefits - NHS - The truth about sweeteners.

yrreb88

If anything, because both are artificial sweeteners anyway, I suspect … If anything, because both are artificial sweeteners anyway, I suspect costs/profit margins factor are the reason, not an admittance or proof it's bad or should be removed from sale etc. Pepsi recently removed aspartame from their Diet version in the USA because they thought that's what their customers wanted as sales were dropping. According to their CEO:"“If you go and poll consumers today and read all the social media reports, there’s still trepidation about aspartame,” said Nooyi. “There’s no scientific reason for that, but people are somehow worried about aspartame.” - I blame the internet. However sales continued to drop even quicker so they soon reversed the decision and and brought back the "Classic" Diet Pepsi so they can satisfy more customers.



Difference is though that Sucralose was a purpose built sweetener - its actually a sugar (sucrose) alcohol.

Aspartame was founded by mistake by scientists developing an ulcer cream. The scientist accidentally touched food and found had a sweet taste. It was rushed through in the US into food as the money and profit potential from a zero calorie sweetener was realised.

Some big brand supermarkets banned aspartame from the own brand versions of their food due to conducting research among their customers. Big brand drinks companies have also started to replace aspartame with sucralose.

Edited by: "jimbo23" 20th Oct 2016

jimbo23

Difference is though that Sucralose was a purpose built sweetener - its … Difference is though that Sucralose was a purpose built sweetener - its actually a sugar (sucrose) alcohol.Aspartame was founded by mistake by scientists developing an ulcer cream. The scientist accidentally touched food and found had a sweet taste. It was rushed through in the US into food as the money and profit potential from a zero calorie sweetener was realised. Some big brand supermarkets banned aspartame from the own brand versions of their food due to conducting research among their customers. Big brand drinks companies have also started to replace aspartame with sucralose.



Sorry to be blunt but what is your point? Many discoveries have been accidental. Viagra was originally meant to be used to treat high blood pressure, now look at it. The safety of aspartame has been proven many times so whatever happened in the US almost half a century ago isn't really relevant particulalry when it's been found safe by multiple independent organisations such as the WHO and FSA. As I mentioned with the Pepsi example, they removed it and put it back and there is public concern with it for no real reason. It seems to be one of those internet "urban myths" that just won't seem to subside. The EFSA carried out a thorough re-evaluation of it's safety because of public concern and found it to be safe, again.

These companies would be replacing one artificial sweetener with another, I doubt it will significantly increase sales and profit with Pepsi's venture being a good example but who knows. Companies reformulating, which happens all the time anyway, is not evidence of an issue in my opinion.

yrreb88

Sorry to be blunt but what is your point? Many discoveries have been … Sorry to be blunt but what is your point? Many discoveries have been accidental. Viagra was originally meant to be used to treat high blood pressure, now look at it. The safety of aspartame has been proven many times so whatever happened in the US almost half a century ago isn't really relevant particulalry when it's been found safe by multiple independent organisations such as the WHO and FSA. As I mentioned with the Pepsi example, they removed it and put it back and there is public concern with it for no real reason. It seems to be one of those internet "urban myths" that just won't seem to subside. The EFSA carried out a thorough re-evaluation of it's safety because of public concern and found it to be safe, again. These companies would be replacing one artificial sweetener with another, I doubt it will significantly increase sales and profit with Pepsi's venture being a good example but who knows. Companies reformulating, which happens all the time anyway, is not evidence of an issue in my opinion.



What does the body do when it rejects something? You are sick or go to the toilet a lot.

The fact that most artificially sweetened products carry a 'laxative effect' warning might suggest that your body is trying rid of it out of the system.
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text