It's not BPA anymore, but something very similar.

Also, PFAS is not the plural of PFA - those are actually different classes of chemicals.

Thanks for the correction!

Did they switch recently? As of 2020, it seems there was BPA in aluminium can linings of Coca-Cola? https://www.coca-cola.co.uk/our-business/faqs/does-coca-cola...

I don't think someone trying to be totally healthy is going to be drinking Soda or any of these juices with their ridiculously high sugar content anyway.

Two things:

1. Lots of drinks come in metal cans with BPA lining on the inside.

2. You can absolutely be reasonably healthy and drink some of these drinks, including the variants that are not sugar-free. I don’t think most people try to be perfectionistically healthy. But I think PFAs are not anywhere closer “reasonably healthy” to consume.

It's kinda like saying people can be reasonably healthy and still smoke some cigarettes. True enough, but if someone is trying to be healthy that's a pretty obvious change to make.

I don't think I ever considered drinking from cans healthy, it is just a desperate move if no better option is present. Same beer tastes significantly worse compared to glass (but if you drink cheapest crap you probably don't notice nor care).

Wine would be a better analogy. It contains a large amount of a known carcinogen (alcohol), but plenty of people who try to be healthy don't feel particularly guilty about drinking some wine every now and then.

I don't know if it's a better analogy, but I agree that it's a good one. There are tons of things that won't outright kill you on first exposure, but are good candidates for minimizing if you want to improve your health.

BPA is not plastic.