SRSLY? ABA Rep Tries to Defend High Caffeine Energy Drinks #EpicFail

May 30th, 2013. By AbiK

Love it when a reader comments on one of our articles and her comment tries to defend something absurd. Like energy drinks with a sh*tload of caffeine in them. That young kids are drinking. And potentially even dying from.

This reader, who left her message with the screen name “MaureenatABA” (note, a quick gander over at the ABA site shows a Maureen Beach as their Director, Communications. Coincidence?) —and for those of you thinking that’s the American Bar Association, no, that would be the American Beverage Association—commented on a recent article we posted, “Monster Energy Drinks Attorney Weighs In“, in which attorney Kevin Goldberg with Goldberg, Finnegan & Mester provided insight on what’s wrong with how energy drinks are classified (or not) by the FDA. It’s a dubious system at best.

Needless to say, as one of the attorneys representing the family of Anais Fournier, the 14-year-old girl who drank two bottles of Monster Energy drinks and went into cardiac arrest and died six days later—Goldberg has some unique insight into energy drinks (and I imagine a hell of a lot of discovery). The Monster drink lawsuit, btw, is a wrongful death one that alleges not only dangerous levels of caffeine in the drink, but inappropriate marketing of the energy drink to children.

I should share MaureenatABA’s comment:

“Most energy drinks contain significantly less caffeine than a similarly-sized cup of coffeehouse coffee.  In fact, many contain about half (http://bit.ly/11FcrFN).  In addition, a Harvard study revealed that there is not enough caffeine in a standard energy drink to trigger an arrhythmia, even in a person with a pre-existing heart condition (http://1.usa.gov/16gzKXN).  Energy drinks have been enjoyed safely by millions of people around the world for more than 25 years and in the U.S. for more than 15.- Maureen at ABA“

Well, Maureen, posting a link to the ABA’s chart depicting caffeine levels in a soft drink, an energy drink, and a cup of coffee is a bit lame. It’s a pretty picture, of course, though the scale of the 16-oz. soft drink icon is a bit off and the blatant green circle on the coffee clearly (and shamelessly, c’mon) targets Starbuck’s—but that’s all it is: a picture. It doesn’t cite independent sources that have tested for caffeine levels, and oddly, it shows a different story than what Consumer Reports reported back in December when it—independently—provided a different chart that listed caffeine levels in specific brand name drinks. If you missed that chart, it’s shown at right.

Oh MaureenatABA—I forgot—you’re probably then saying that there’s that Harvard study you referenced! You are so right. And here’s some interesting things about that:

1. It’s from 1989.

2. The mean age of the study participants was 61 years.

3. The drinks the study participants received had 200 mg caffeine in them.

Forgive me, but what Goldberg is dealing with is…

1. Something that happened recently. Note that you mention that these energy drinks have been in the U.S. for the last 15 years. According to my math, 2013 minus 15 years brings us to 1998—which is almost a DECADE after the Harvard study was done. The authors of the study surely did not have a supply of today’s energy drinks to test.

2. A younger population. Rather than a population reaching retirement, the lawsuit focuses on a 14-year old child (and, as a class, all children).

3. Caffeine levels that go beyond 200 mg “modest dose” administered in the Harvard study.

For those of you who want a less skewed perspective on the Monster Energy Drink lawsuit, I’d suggest reading Jane Mundy’s interview with attorney Kevin Goldberg. And stay tuned.

 

Tags: American Beverage Association, Caffeinated Drinks, Goldberg Finnegan & Mester, Kevin Goldberg, Monster Energy Drink, Wrongful Death

This was posted on Thursday, May 30th, 2013 at 11:20 am and is filed under Class Action, Consumer Fraud, lawsuits . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.