Sarah Katz, 21, had a heart condition and was not aware of the drink’s caffeine content, which exceeded that of cans of Red Bull and Monster energy drinks combined, according to a legal filing
Sarah Katz, 21, had a heart condition and was not aware of the drink’s caffeine content, which exceeded that of cans of Red Bull and Monster energy drinks combined, according to a legal filing
I don’t mind it existing as a product. If it does though it should be very clearly labeled with warnings that are impossible to miss. This seems great for Panaras on college campuses, but there should be no possibility you confuse it for something else.
More caffeine than two energy drinks combined seems very excessive to me.
So are you suggesting we ban coffee, which typically has more caffeine than this drink?
What coffee are you drinking that has almost 400mg of caffeine in it? Most have around 100mg.
Most light- to medium-roasts approach 150mg/250mL. The one I’m baselining is Dunkin Donuts, the most popular coffee in the US. A standard Large Iced has almost 400mg of caffeine. You can order it with a shot of espresso, if you like.
We have to remember that the drink she was consuming (multiple times) was a 30oz. There are very few coffees with less than 350-400mg of caffeine in a 24oz size (or smaller)
How many people are confusing a large iced coffee with a shot of espresso as a caffeine free beverage?
Wondering the context of this question, considering the topic of this particular chain. Someone said 400mg is excessive, and then someone else doubled-down that they thought coffee didn’t have 400mg of caffeine.
And if it helps you feel better, this actually is coffee. It’s the same green coffee extract that Starbucks Refreshers use, more of it (ironically, Starbucks no longer advertises that their refreshers are caffeinated like they used to despite the fact they are).
Interesting. I tried to find an informative link about green coffee extract, and I stumbled into this. People are acting like that lemonade is this stuff. LOL
You used the size of the lemonade to argue its caffeine content was not excessive given the lemonade was larger in volume than a comparable coffee beverage.
But the topic of this chain started with the girl not realizing the drink was caffeinated to begin with.
The context of my question was calling into doubt the relevance of caffeine to volume ratio in defining “excessive” when the underlying issue was accidental consumption due to (alleged) poor product labeling.
Given she had a heart condition, any amount seems to have been “excessive”.
I think you just made the mistake of conceding my whole point. Yes, if she shouldn’t have had ANY caffeine, we have a problem. And the problem is that she walked to a self-service area where over 90% of the beverages are caffeinated (they have maybe 2 or 3 things that aren’t, tops?), and she filled her cup with the ONLY one that explicitly advertised being caffeinated.
Back to your question:
Yet again, I don’t think this question is relevant ESPECIALLY now that you conceded that the amount of caffeine is irrelevant and not problematic. But here’s the key quotes of the thread, and why I felt your question was out-of-touch:
Note, you just accepted my side of the underlying discussion as fact because it didn’t matter to your new point. That’s how I know your reply was a context-switch.