Randomised controlled trialindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study I-SOD-124 in-depth review

Phosphoric acid in cola did not increase calcium loss

Carbonated beverages and urinary calcium excretion.

Overview

Heaney RP, Rafferty K. Am J Clin Nutr 2001 · PMID 11522558 · DOI 10.1093/ajcn/74.3.343

In a controlled test, cola-type acid did not increase calcium in the urine; only caffeine did, and only slightly.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Test whether soft-drink ingredients make the body lose calcium.

How was the study done?

Randomised crossover test of different drinks.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

Young women who drink soft drinks daily.

What was actually found?

Phosphoric acid had no effect; caffeine a small one.

How large was the observed effect?

About 0.25 mmol extra calcium with caffeine.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Cola acid does not 'drain' calcium; drinking cola instead of milk may matter more.

What are the study's limitations?

Short-term test.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Contradicts the mechanism of the claim.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Applicable.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot exclude long-term effects.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
Heaney RP, Rafferty K
Journal
Am J Clin Nutr
Year
2001
Identifier
PMID 11522558 DOI 10.1093/ajcn/74.3.343
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26 + Crossref 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

Not stated in abstract record

2. Research question

Do constituents of carbonated beverages (phosphoric vs citric acid, caffeine) increase urinary calcium?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Randomised controlled trial – Randomised incomplete-block crossover trial of acute beverage effects
Population

Women aged 20-40 who habitually drank >=680 mL carbonated beverages daily

Country

USA

Period

2001

Sample size

Not stated in abstract

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

Habitual carbonated beverage consumers

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Four carbonated beverages (with/without caffeine; phosphoric or citric acid), 567 mL

Comparator

Water (neutral); milk (positive control)

Endpoints

Urinary calcium, pH, acidity, sodium, creatinine over 5 h

Statistical methods

Comparisons with water

5. Actual results

Results

Relative to water, urinary calcium rose significantly only with the milks and the two caffeine-containing beverages; excess calciuria about 0.25 mmol, similar to caffeine alone. Phosphoric acid without caffeine produced no excess calciuria and did not augment the caffeine effect.

Absolute risks

not applicable

Authors' conclusion

Net effect of carbonated beverage constituents on calcium economy is negligible; skeletal effects are likely due to milk displacement.

6. Strengths

  • Randomised design
  • Isolates phosphoric acid from caffeine

7. Weaknesses

  • Acute (5-h) outcome
  • Small; women only
  • Funding not stated in abstract

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
RoB 2
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
some concerns
Rationale

Acute surrogate endpoint.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

0.25 mmol (about 10 mg) calcium excess is small (stats/C-SOD-08_bone.py).

10. Relevance to the specific claim

Directly contradicts the mechanism in C-SOD-08: phosphoric acid did not increase calcium loss.

11. Independent contrary findings

Long-term studies of phosphoric acid and bone are lacking.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Applicable.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Best direct test of the phosphoric-acid hypothesis; negative.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualitymoderate
Risk of biassome concerns
Precision of resultslow
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Chronic exposure.

15. Linked fact checks