I WAS 13 when it was launched. To a feral, Bishopbriggs teenager, the introduction of Diet Coke on August 9, 1982 couldn’t have been less relevant. We couldn't afford regular Coke, or the calorie-free version. It was intensely ironic that the iconic sugar-laden soft drink was dubbed as “The Real Thing”. For my brothers and I, it couldn’t have been less real.

Red Kola, Alpine Cola and Koala Kola all artfully imitated the “Real Thing” without impinging on the jealously-guarded branding or the even more jealously guarded “secret recipe”.

The amount of sugar in Coke is anything but a secret. Have a guess. Go on. How many teaspoons of sugar are there in a 330ml can. One? Two? Try (wait for it) seven. Seven teaspoons of sugar per can, a princely 35 grammes: more than a third of the recommended adult’s daily intake of sugar.

So it’s no wonder that some eight decades after welcoming the whole world to Coke, the company thought it prudent to introduce a “Diet” version. In 1982 Diet Coke was born and instantly became the biggest selling low-calorie fizzy pop product in the States.

And if that wasn’t impressive enough, after less than two decades, Diet Coke leapfrogged Pepsi to give Coke the much sought after one/two in the top of the pops, so to speak.

No small part of this success was the pragmatic targeting of women in their advertising. The “Diet Coke Break” commercial – in which a group of female office workers rush to the windows at 11.30am each day to watch a shirtless builder open a can of the chilled drink – was a cultural phenomenon, swapping traditional gender roles with women ogling the topless, muscle-bound topless hunk (who was unlike any builder I have ever had round to quote to fit a new kitchen).

I’m not going to pretend I’ve never had a Coke. I use it like medicine. The caffeine and high sugar content can help get me through a long day and/or a hangover. But interestingly I can count on one hand the times I have had a Diet Coke break. Perhaps it’s my inbuilt suspicion about how the sweetness of sugar can be replaced by an artificial, human-made sweetener. Unsurprisingly, I’m not alone in that suspicion. The secret to the success of the diet drink version is methyl ester, which goes by the name of Aspartame. Two hundred times sweeter than regular sugar, there are few more rigorously and repeatedly tested food ingredients than Aspartame. Diet drinkers should be reassured by this fastidious and frequent checking. Many have searched for the negative effects of this sugar substitute but there appears simply not to be one. While this is patently true, evidence suggests that Aspartame appears not to aid long-term weight loss.

Having said that, Diet Coke has next to no nutritional content. Carbonated water, caramel colour, aspartame, phosphoric acid, potassium benzoate, natural flavours, citric acid and caffeine may provide high scores at Scrabble but that is about all. And maybe that’s my problem.

I’m suspicious of science that creates products that are hundreds of times sweeter than sugar, in the same way I suspect canned meat/fish/vegetable products that suggest a shelf life of five or six years. It’s the reason why I don’t eat fast food burgers: I just can’t work out how you can create a decent burger, in a bun, with fries and a drink while paying your staff and your high street rent and yet only charge a few quid.

I have no doubt that the Coca Cola company are excellent people who care passionately about their customers, doing all they possibly can to ensure that only a reasonable and rational amount is consumed. They have even invested £10 million into the “Zero sugar campaign to help people reduce their sugar intake”.

What a noble and consumer-focused notion. I’m sure that the 11 per cent drop in sales and a 20 per cent drop in profits experienced this year by Coca Cola was purely a coincidence. The $83 billion peak valuation of the brand some two years ago has diminished to a paltry $78 billion. It’s still one of the biggest brands in the world.

I’d like to teach the world to sing a different song, a song that perhaps supports small businesses and maybe engages a little more in local communities and are less interested in global brand domination. It could be a perfect harmony ...