[01.13] - Sip Smart

I remember when our first Starbucks opened; summer 2006, Marina Village. Latte lovers lined up, eyes glazed over with joy at the promise of frothy, caffeinated pleasure.

I viewed the new chain with the sceptical neutrality I reserve for the ever-growing number of American companies that land, expand, burgeon, and thrive with imperial vigour.

Of course, in time, I too could be found snuggled into a cosy armchair, sipping unpronounceable beverages and revelling in the atmosphere and free internet. As Starbucks’ stronghold spreads—right along with the average Bahamian waistline—I can’t help but view the newcomer as simply another chance for consumers to make daft food choices.

Don’t get me wrong. I like what widely available coffee shops have done for society. They’re great for cheap socializing. They offer an enticing atmosphere, and are a pleasant alternative to liquor-fueled meeting places. No other food and beverage establishment is so conducive to reading, studying, or loitering long after you’ve consumed what you paid for.

But the sad fact is that most of us are getting far more out of Starbucks than social pleasures and a much-needed caffeine hit. If we were fat-happy and sugar-hyped on Big Macs and Papa Johns before, last thing any of us needed to add to the mix was unhindered enjoyment of drinks with six-word names and four inches of whipped cream on top.

Now, you all like a treat. I like them, too. Heck, the joneser who tried to bum $5 off my brother for a frappuccino clearly liked to get his. But I’m pretty sure plenty people standing in line for a little something to sip would be better off with bottle of water than a grande Green Tea Latte, replete with its 41 grams (i.e., 10 teaspoons) of sugar.

I’m not saying this to rehash old points. I know we here on Woden's Way have chided and tutted over weighty matters and nasty ingredients before. But I know I was pretty surprised when I found out that what I thought was a fairly virtuous choice—steamed soymilk with hazelnut—was as sweet as the sodas I’ve shunned for years.

Shame on Starbucks? Not really, and certainly not exclusively. Like almost every other chain that’s laid down roots here, it’s out to make money through taste, and taste tends to be passed on through sweet, salt, or fat. But finding that a mocha packs about as much fat as a helping of medium fries raises larger issues about what we welcome into our country and our bodies, and what we might want to consider siphoning off, culturally.

Rich, sweet, cool drinks marched into our field of vision; we, like sheep, it seems, line up at the watering trough and cheerily sip away. More often than not, we’re sipping in addition to whatever we were eating before, so that 15-fat-gram drink isn’t replacing a meal, just washing it down. Another great international company is at our fingertips, and we’re wise enough to choose its unhealthiest offerings to supplement our already abysmal diets.

Is Starbucks going anywhere? I highly doubt it, though I do hope more locally-owned businesses, perhaps with a healthy spin and unique decor, can open up and offer quality and diversity. Even more so, I wish we’d approach our new national fix with a nutritional smarts and we can enjoy the social benefits of such places, without letting them morph into yet another way to spoil what’s left of our health.

-ja**ly