1. Dear Drugs-Forum readers: We are a small non-profit that runs one of the most read drug information & addiction help websites in the world. We serve over 4 million readers per month, and have costs like all popular websites: servers, hosting, licenses and software. To protect our independence we do not run ads. We take no government funds. We run on donations which average $25. If everyone reading this would donate $5 then this fund raiser would be done in an hour. If Drugs-Forum is useful to you, take one minute to keep it online another year by donating whatever you can today. Donations are currently not sufficient to pay our bills and keep the site up. Your help is most welcome. Thank you.
    PLEASE HELP
  1. Calliope
    View attachment 32305 Fans of Monster Energy, the popular high-caffeine energy drink, may not notice the change: its ingredients will be the same and its familiar label bearing a green, clawlike monogram will change only slightly. But the drink’s maker has decided after a decade of selling it as a dietary supplement to market it as a beverage, a switch that will bring significant changes in how it is regulated.

    Among them: Monster Beverage, the nation’s biggest seller of energy drinks, will no longer be required to tell federal regulators about reports potentially linking its products to deaths and injuries.

    The company’s recent move, which follows a similar regulatory makeover by another brand, Rockstar Energy, comes amid intensifying scrutiny of energy drink safety. On Tuesday, a group of 18 doctors and researchers sent a letter to the Food and Drug Administration urging it to take action to protect adolescents and children from the possible risks of high caffeine consumption. “There is evidence in the published scientific literature that the caffeine levels in energy drinks pose serious potential health risks,” the researchers wrote.

    Monster Beverage’s new cans will also disclose caffeine content for the first time. A 16-ounce can of Monster’s most popular energy drinks will contain 140 to 160 milligrams of caffeine, compared with about 330 milligrams in a 16-ounce cup of Starbucks coffee.

    View attachment 32311 The company is fighting back against critics on several fronts. This month, it held a news conference to dispute accusations in a lawsuit that the death of a 14-year-old girl was linked to high caffeine levels in Monster Energy. Separately, it threatened to sue a nutritionist who publishes a newsletter for elementary schools for statements that it said were defamatory.

    The changes by Monster and Rockstar demonstrate the degree to which energy drink manufacturers can decide which rules to follow.

    “We don’t have energy drinks defined by any regulation,” Daniel Fabricant, director of the F.D.A.’s dietary supplement division, acknowledged in an interview in October.

    For a decade, Monster sold its products as dietary supplements, apparently as part of a strategy to convince consumers that they were different from beverages. But the company, like its competitors, has run into a spate of bad news, including the disclosure in October that the F.D.A. had received reports in recent years that mentioned its drinks in connection with deaths and injuries.

    Since then, the F.D.A. has received three more death reports and 14 injury reports that cite Monster energy drinks, an F.D.A. spokeswoman, Tamara Ward, said in an e-mail. In recent months, the agency has also received added reports about other energy products; since October, for example, it has received 38 reports that cite the popular energy “shot” 5-Hour Energy, including five involving a death.

    The mention of a product in an incident report filed with the F.D.A. does not mean the product played a role in a death or injury, and such reports may provide few details. Monster Beverage and the maker of 5-Hour Energy have insisted that their products are safe and unrelated to the reported episodes.

    A spokesman for Monster, Michael Sitrick, said the company had decided to market its products as beverages for several reasons. One was to stop what he described as “misguided criticism” that the company was selling its energy drinks as dietary supplements because of the belief that such products were more lightly regulated than beverages. Another consideration, he said, was that consumers can use government-subsidized food stamps to buy beverages.

    “Monster Energy drinks could equally satisfy the regulatory requirements” for either category, Mr. Sitrick said.

    An executive vice president at Rockstar, Joseph Cannata, said the company had made the change because consumers found food labels easier to read. In January, all production of Rockstar energy drinks switched to those labels, he said.

    Rockstar had previously disclosed its caffeine content.

    A lawyer who represents supplement makers, Justin J. Prochnow, said companies like Monster and Rockstar might have had another incentive. Over the last two years, the F.D.A. has intensified its scrutiny of the supplement industry’s manufacturing practices, driving up production costs.

    As beverage producers, Monster and Rockstar will face some reporting mandates, including some that are stiffer than the mandates for supplement makers. Such companies are required to notify the government when they think a product could cause injury, a rule intended mainly to limit the distribution of tainted food. In addition, they are required to maintain scientific data supporting the safety of any ingredients they use that are not already cleared by the government. They can also voluntarily notify the F.D.A. about adverse events possibly affecting individual consumers, a step Monster Beverage said it planned to take.

    Mr. Sitrick said Monster’s move to list caffeine content followed its decision to join the American Beverage Association, an industry trade group, which urges member companies to make such disclosures. He estimated that half of the company’s products would list caffeine content by April, and 90 percent by May.

    In a recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Monster Beverage, which is based in Corona, Calif., said that negative media reports about energy drinks had created “softness” in demand. Its stock, which traded for $83.96 last spring, closed at $49.72 on Tuesday, a decrease of more than 40 percent. Rockstar is privately held.

    The energy drink industry also faces several investigations from federal and state officials into claims that its products provide benefits lacking in other caffeine sources, like coffee. Researchers say there is little evidence to support these claims.

    At a recent news conference, Monster Beverage denied accusations that it was responsible for the 2011 death of a Maryland teenager who had consumed two 24-ounce cans of Monster Energy. The company said that tests were never conducted on the 14-year-old, Anais Fournier, to determine caffeine levels in her blood.

    A lawyer representing her family, Kevin Goldberg, said a state medical examiner had found that the teenager, who had an underlying heart condition, died of a cardiac arrhythmia caused by caffeine toxicity. A spokesman for the chief medical examiner’s office in Baltimore declined to comment, citing continuing litigation.

    Monster Beverage also claimed recently that the March issue of a newsletter sent to elementary school students and their parents contained defamatory statements that had “materially damaged Monster and its well-known brand.” It objected to several statements in the newsletter, Build Healthy Kids, including one that said children had died from energy drinks and should “never drink” them.

    In a letter dated March 4, the company demanded that Deborah Kennedy, a nutritionist who publishes the newsletter, retract and correct the statements within five days or face a lawsuit.

    Ms. Kennedy, who lives in Connecticut, said in an interview that she was stunned by the threat, in part because the newsletter never mentioned Monster Energy or any other product by name, but focused instead on the need for children to cut down on sugar-laden beverages.

    In response, she called on one of Connecticut’s United States senators, Richard Blumenthal, who is a critic of the energy drink industry. Mr. Blumenthal’s office contacted Monster, which agreed to withhold legal action pending a meeting with Ms. Kennedy.

    Ms. Kennedy, who holds a doctorate in nutrition, said she thought the audience for her newsletter, children from kindergarten through fifth grade, should not consume energy drinks. “They are going after me for reaching that segment, and it boggles my mind,” she said.

    Mr. Sitrick, the Monster spokesman, said that the 7-year-old son of a Monster employee had received the newsletter at his school and was upset by it. The boy showed it to his father, who brought it to the attention of a company lawyer.

    “No child, much less a 7-year-old, should be falsely informed that his or her father’s employer is a child killer, especially since there are no facts to support the allegation,” Mr. Sitrick said. He added that Ms. Kennedy had yet to meet with a lawyer for Monster.

    Last week, Senator Blumenthal and two other Democratic lawmakers, Senator Richard J. Durbin of Illinois and Representative Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts, sent a letter to Monster Beverage urging it to apologize for the tone of its letter to Ms. Kennedy and asking whether the company had threatened others with lawsuits.

    Mr. Sitrick said the company was still reviewing the letter but continued to believe that Ms. Kennedy’s statements were defamatory.

    NYTimes
    By BARRY MEIER
    Read story here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/20/business/in-a-new-aisle-energy-drinks-sidestep-rules.html

    Read the DF story about death of the Maryland teenager who drank 48 ozs Monster Energy Drink.

Comments

  1. Calliope
    Suit Claims Energy Drink Maker Markets to Children
    May 6, 2013

    The city attorney of San Francisco sued Monster Beverage Corporation, the nation’s biggest maker of highly caffeinated energy drinks, claiming Monday that it was marketing its products to children who might suffer ill effects from them.

    In a statement, Dennis J. Herrera, the city attorney, said he had acted because Monster Beverage, unlike some competitors, specifically marketed its products to children and younger teenagers.

    “Monster Energy is unique among energy drink makers for the extent to which it targets children and youth in its marketing, despite the known risks its products pose to young people’s health and safety,” Mr. Herrera said on Monday.

    [IMGL="white"]http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=32785&stc=1&d=1367935062[/IMGL]The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco Superior Court, aims to restrict the way the company markets its drinks, and seeks civil penalties.

    It follows a recent lawsuit against Mr. Herrera by Monster Beverage that seeks to block an inquiry into the company by his office, arguing that he lacks authority to regulate it.

    Michael Sitrick, a spokesman for Monster Beverage, called the allegations in the suit filed Monday “demonstrably false,” and said the company, which is based in Corona, Calif., had repeatedly stated that it did not market to children.

    Beverage makers typically define children as younger than 12 years old.

    Monday’s lawsuit is the latest of several brought against the energy drink industry by public officials and others. The Food and Drug Administration recently said that it would investigate potential risks to teenagers from excessive caffeine in energy drinks and other products to which companies are adding the stimulant, like chewing gum and snacks.

    Monster Beverage and other energy drink producers have defended themselves by pointing out that the level of caffeine in a cup of coffee sold by chains like Starbucks is often higher than in a similarly sized can of an energy drink.

    Some officials, however, like Mr. Herrera, said that they were particularly concerned that Monster Beverage was aiming its marketing at younger teenagers, a group more sensitive to caffeine’s effects than adults.

    In his lawsuit, Mr. Herrera said the company ran marketing programs like the “Monster Energy Drink Player of the Game,” which showed photographs of high school athletes holding the beverage.

    “As the industry’s worst offender, Monster Energy should reform its irresponsible and illegal marketing practices before they’re forced to by regulators or courts,” Mr. Herrera said in his statement.

    Until early this year, Monster Beverage and another energy drink producer, Rockstar Inc., marketed their products as dietary supplements. But both companies have told the F.D.A. that they are now marketing them as beverages, a category of products governed by a different set regulations than dietary supplements.

    NYTimes
    By BARRY MEIER

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/07/business/suit-claims-monster-beverage-markets-to-children.html
To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!