Caffeinated Alcoholic Drinks May Be Illegal 398
Anonymusing writes "The FDA has announced an investigation into the safety and legality of alcoholic beverages containing caffeine. As a Wall Street Journal blog reports, two major beer companies, MillerCoors and Anheuser-Busch, stopped producing caffeinated alcoholic drinks last year after reports surfaced of increased negative effects compared to caffeine-free alcohol. CNN notes that, according to FDA rules, 'food additives require premarket approval based on data demonstrating safety submitted to the agency' — and caffeine is a food additive. The 26 targeted beverage makers have 30 days to respond."
Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:2, Insightful)
Or is that not going to be available either?
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Interesting)
Or will they start monitoring in stores now that you wont buy vodka and red bull at the same time?
It's also interesting that alcohol is being kept legal while it has a lot more health issues than like cannabis, like heart disease, dementia, cancer, alcoholism, diabetes, strokes and then the usual ones like hangover and weight problems. It seems it should be other way around.
That being said, I prefer good vodka (Russian Standard Vodka) over beer any day. Usually the best mix is just some smashed ice and lime. I used to mix with red bull, but it tastes like shit now.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Funny)
The USA tried banning alcohol once, but it didn't work out too well.
At least we got cool bar names like "The 21st Amendment" out of it.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Funny)
We tried banning cannabis, cocaine, heroin, and a laundry list of other drugs as well
I don't know about cocaine or heroin, but I am all for banning the eating of other people, AND banning me having to do laundry.
(lame joke quota: filled... for now...)
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Funny)
I am all for banning the eating of other people.
Really I think its a waste of perfectly good food to not to eat people. Think of how many starving people 1 fat person would feed. It is like recycling food.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Funny)
Human Resources ?
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Funny)
Human Resources ?
From a new hire package:
Retirement Options
Please select the end of the statement you feel most closely matches your lifestyle and personal preferences:
When I retire I would like:
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Well, maybe with chiani.... and if properly prepared, then again, there is that prion issue.
No, I think I'll stand by my sig, as long as I deign preserve it thus.
Sounds good (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Probably none. They're fat, not muscular. Eating bodybuilders, on the other hand, may pan out in a crisis.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, you don't care about what that's going to do to the cholesterol levels of those poor starving people.
At least we can feed them lean people, instead. I have a neighbor who's out running every morning. He doesn't have much meat, but what's there is probably healthy, if a bit stringy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Dude, it's all about the marinade.
I have found that if you lay the runner-steaks in a shallow bowl of garlic and tamari overnight, cover it and set it in the refrigerator, it'll be both tasty and tender the next day.
Then, just before the meat is done, you add one beaten egg yolk and the juice from one pineal gland to the marinade, bring it to a simmer and use it as a reduction sauce. You can a
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and it's OK for you.
~X~
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Oh great. Another movie ending spoiled.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Karma be damned: Yes, it has worked out better. Sixty-plus percent of Americans drink alcohol (CBS) while only about 7% use illegal drugs (White House), and that includes marijuana.
The "war on drugs" has its problems to be sure, but it certainly does reduce drug use in the general population if only because it chokes the supply.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't choke the supply.. at all.
The only good the war on drugs has done is indoctrinated the public into believing that at all illegal drugs are evil and will steal your soul.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Go to your nearest college campus. It's practically a black market emporium, whether you need PILLS HERE (uppers, downers, stimulants, concentration enhancers, etc.) or any number of other recreational drugs.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a large number of people here (myself included) that wouldn't know where to find drugs if they wanted them this week.
That's just because you don't want any this week. If you did, you'd know.
I don't want any this week, either, but I know someone who would know, if I did want any.
See, I don't think we've done anything, because the simple fact of the matter is that most people don't actually want to do anything harder than pot (which is why we should legalize it). I've never liked pot, but I've experimented considerably beyond that, and you know what? Drugs suck. I don't think they should be illegal, but I also don't think we are really reducing users any, because the vast majority of people who try them don't keep doing them.
Alcohol, for all its ills, is very easy to use and very easy to dose correctly. Mistakes still happen, but the truth of the matter is that doing a little of it feels good, and then it starts feeling bad and worse and worse the more you do. There is a very large swath of dosage of that drug that is just plain unpleasant, and that is usually enough to keep people from hurting themselves on it. Even so, people--usually novice users of it--sometimes go too far. No matter though, because when that happens, you just take them to the hospital and get their stomach pumped.
I say "no matter" because when you decide to do that, you're not deciding to go to jail after the hospital. And that is am important difference between legal drugs and illegal drugs.
Now, there are some people for whom the unpleasantness of drunkenness is not dissuasive. They will keep using until they are addicted. The same is true with any other drug you can think of--some people can't or won't control themselves, and you can't stop them from destroying their lives with substances. They are weak people, even when they are our friends and family members, and they get what they deserve.
Maybe it's in their character; maybe it's in their genes, but they are going to die in a gutter whether drugs are illegal or not.
So why do all of us have to have our rights trampled and lose our sovereignty over what we do with our own bodies just to vainly try to save degenerates who are not long for this world and are only trivially affected by these laws?
You, Mr. Freeman, have obviously not tried enough drugs or been around enough users to have any idea what you're talking about.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Informative)
7% use illegal drugs (White House), and that includes marijuana.
yeah, so consider the source. A recent survey here in NH found 11% freely admitting to pollsters that they smoke weed.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Insightful)
So you've forced some people not to use a harmless substance at what cost? Billions of dollars wasted. Thousands killed by gangs and cartels. Millions of fellow citizens locked up and living off of your money. Countless violations of constitutional rights in order to enforce the pointless bans.
Prohibition is a disgrace and you've got to be either an idiot, or making money off it to argue otherwise.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Interesting)
You consider the White House to be a valid source on illegal drug use stats? That sounds about as valid as a study from Mr. Kalashnikov showing that AK47s are the best machine guns available. I'd trust numbers from the DEA before the White House - they're just enforcing the policies, not trying to shove their importance down everyone's throats.
Maybe it's a regional thing, but I'd guess it's closer to 20-30% around here. If you were to look only at people between 17-25, it's probably 60%+.
Of course, it also depends how you quantify "use". Daily? Once a week? A month? A year? Ever?
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree. It has worked awesome. At only the cost of a billions on dollars, literally hundreds of thousands of deaths, the funding of black markets, and the countless ruined lives for minor drug offenses, we have done a great job making it so that only about 10% of the population is criminal at any one time for using a basically harmless drug that ranks below caffeine and alcohol in terms of side effectives. Mission accomplished! We are winning the war on drugs!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
We tried banning cannabis, cocaine, heroin, and a laundry list of other drugs as well. It hasn't worked out any better.
That's simply not true. It's provided tremendous revenue for black ops government entities that don't officially exist, has kept the military industrial complex well fed, the US at a constant state of 'war' and provided cover for a creeping police state.
It's worked out tremendously (unless you care about quaint things like rule-of-law).
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Hah! You're busted! Only pot smokers talk about how "cannabis" laws are unjust, stupid, or just don't work. They're perfectly correct and some of their points can not be argued with, but the rest of us, the non-hippies how abide by our laws, say "marijuana." Don't worry, slashdot obviously does not require any pre-posting drug screens, so you're in the clear.
PS wanna go out to the pa
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
We tried banning cannabis, cocaine, heroin, and a laundry list of other drugs as well. It hasn't worked out any better.
Actually, out of all of those the only one we've banned is pot. The others are restricted, but legally available from your local pharmacy.
I don't believe that heroin is legally available even by prescription, at least not in the U.S. It's a Schedule I controlled substance [wikipedia.org], here which means, among other things, that:
(A) The drug or other substance has a high potential for abuse.
(B) The drug or other substance has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States.
You're right about cocaine, though; it's sometimes still used as a local anesthetic.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Informative)
Cocaine is, in fact, the only local I know of that can be used in the eye. Go ask an eye surgeon how much cocaine they use in a month. It'll be a non-trivial amount, and absurdly pure, but unfortunately also metered to an extraordinary fineness, and covered with seals and signatures ten ways to Sunday.
There's actually a chemical plant in New Jersey that provides all of the US G'vmt's legal cocaine supply. They give the post-processed leaves to Coca-Cola for extraction of the infamous non-active ingredients afterwords. It's a fun research topic.
Vicodin vs. Morphine vs. Heroin (Score:3, Informative)
Morphine's available in the US for similar applications, and for most applications it's as good as or better than heroin.
Vicodin (hydrocodone plus acetaminophen/paracetamol ) is widely prescribed for unsupervised use, for people who need something a bit stronger than codeine (which is also mixed with acetaminophen here) - the FDA and DEA allow it because the acetaminophen will rot your liver and kidneys if you take abuse-level doses, so they don't mind if your dentist prescribes you a bottle of 20 to take u
Re: (Score:2)
In certain circumstances I think certain combinations are appropriately banned, like liquor store / car dealership for example
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Since is only looking at pre-mixed drinks; you're free to mix vodka and red bull if you want, and in fact bars are free to mix them for their patrons as well.
Re: (Score:3)
[Citation Needed]
Re:The thing about cannabis... (Score:5, Informative)
I'm not going to argue the "kinda out of it for a month" claim but I challenge you to produce the results of any study that backs up your claim that isn't countered by double the number of studies that find exactly the opposite, but your claim that you're "ok maybe two or three days later" is ridiculous. Brain damage, cirrhosis, heart disease are some permanent problems just to name a few, and if that's not good enough for you, you can die by drinking it quickly enough.
Go try to die or have any permanent effect by smoking as much pot as you possibly can as fast as you can. Unless you have asthma or a very bad heart or something, you will fail, every time. Use a vaporizer, a gravity bong, it doesn't matter, you just can't do it. I'm not even sure you could permanently hurt yourself if you ate a pound of the stuff. In studies, the lethal to effective dose ratio from animal studies, I've seen numbers anywhere from 250:1 to 40,000:1. Even for really really good weed, where you would feel something off half of a normal-sized hit, and using the 250:1 statistic which is frankly so far outside what every other study I've seen that it should hardly be considered, you'd have to take 125 hits to die. All I have to say is, go try to take 125 hits of weed good enough to get you stoned of half a hit. Just try, try as hard as you can.
On second thought, I will argue against your "out of it for a month" claim, because it's just so ridiculous. No drug lasts for a month, that's just silly. If you did try it, and you felt out of it for a month, you either smoked something laced with an exotic research chemical (you didn't), or I'm afraid it was nothing but your overactive imagination at work.
Extended effects (Score:4, Insightful)
I've heard LSD called the drug that keeps on giving. So even if the drug itself is no longer in your system, there could be mental effects for a month after.
I can't comment on natural marijuana, but I did take synthetic THC (Marinol) during chemotherapy. I wasn't getting much effect from single-pill doses, so one night I tried two pills spaced two hours apart (which was still well within the prescribed dosage). A couple hours later I was hit with unpleasant hallucinations and distortions of time (my blog entry [blogspot.com]). My body returned to normal overnight, but my brain was well scrambled for at least a week.
So I don't think it's crazy to say some drugs could have an effect for longer than they're measurable in the bloodstream. I'd like to see more scientific studies of many drugs and legalization of those that can be used with reasonable safety. Maybe natural marijuana would have been a better treatment for my chemotherapy side effects, but unfortunately in my district it's still thoroughly illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
It's hard to blame them; alcohol is already dangerous and adding a stimulant can only make it worse. I bet they have trouble drawing the line between "powerful psychoactive drug linked to addiction and serious long-term health problems" and "same but legal for political reasons."
Not that caffeine is particularly dangerous, but someone at the FDA probably gets buried in controversy every time a new alcohol product lands on his desk.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Interesting)
I found the comment at the end of this article [news.com.au] very telling (even if it is about Australia, not the U.S.):
"Dealers often advertise this drug as being like ecstasy but its properties are much more similar to cocaine and amphetamines," said Professor Iain McGregor, director of Sydney University's Psychopharmacology Laboratory. "Users get feelings of euphoria, it's dancey, it's happy, a bit trippy.
"Unfortunately for people like myself and Paul (Dillon), who are here to tell people drugs are bad, there doesn't appear to be a whole lot that is bad about it."
You heard it here first, folks. It's 'unfortunate' for the regulators when there "doesn't appear to be a whole lot that is bad about" a mood altering substance.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's an untested drug. Its effects on the body have never been studied. People are taking it anyway, and regulators don't have an easy warning to tell users to get them to stop taking it.
FDA-approved prescription medications have a long enough history of terrifying mistakes. If there's a place to take a stand for conscientious drug use, it's not here
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Insightful)
What I was doing was strongly condemning the attitude of a publicly funded scientist who seems to believe that it is his duty to paint recreational drug use as a bad thing regardless of whether or not it is genuinely harmful.
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:4, Interesting)
Of course it's his job. Here in the UK, the government's scientific advisor on drugs was foolish enough to advise based on the actual science. He got sacked as a result.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I thought he got sacked not for the advice per-se but for bitching publicly when the governement ignored his advice.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
To be honest, alcohol is one of the worst drugs for the fact that it's one of the most addictive (compare, e.g. with THC/Cannabis, Psylocibin/'Shrooms or LSD, which are not addictive), most toxic and socially most destructive (because it increases agressiveness).
Yet alcohol is 100% legal in any amounts, and all other drugs (of which some are safe and actually beneficial (e.g. THC is a powerful antidepressant and apparently improves the condition of Alzheimer's patients)) are 100% illegal in any amounts.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Mines a vodka and red bull... (Score:5, Informative)
Not only is it physically addictive, it's also one of the few substances who's withdrawal symptoms can kill you [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Back in the mid-70s, when I was young, I made a great discovery: first, have a shot of tequila, mano a mano and back it up with a glass of Mexican Coffee. (Like Irish, but with tequila instead of Irish whiskey.) When that's empty, get a refill on both. The tequila gets you drunk and the coffee gets you wired, resulting in
Shoot, there goes my Irish Coffee. Is Decafe ok? (Score:2)
And would my bartender get arrested?
Re:Shoot, there goes my Irish Coffee. Is Decafe ok (Score:5, Informative)
Point-of-sale mixed drinks are specifically excluded. It's kind of arbitrary, yeah, but the FDA doesn't really have jurisdiction over that kind of thing. State and local health departments do, of course, and I can see some overzealous crusader trying to make a name for himself that way, but trying to get rid of classic caffeine-and-alcohol combinations like Irish coffee or rum and Coke would probably create too much of a backlash.
Hmmm, I wonder about chocolate and coffee liqueurs? I can't see them banning Kahlua any time soon, either.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Shoot, there goes my Irish Coffee. Is Decafe ok (Score:5, Interesting)
Unless we're talking about spanish coffees, alcoholic coffee drinks often have a lot less liquor than the drinks they are talking about. A shot of vodka in a 6 oz. red bull has tremendous side effects for a lot of people.
My own informal research done in bars among friends who enjoy drinks like this, heart palpitations aren't unusual after a few vodka/redbulls or jager bombs. Mixing a moderate stimulant with a strong depressant just spells disaster.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Potential disaster or not, as long as people are making an informed and deliberate choice I fail to see the need for government action.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly, and I fail to see how vodka+red bull would have tremendous side effects on people any more than other liquor.
However one thing I've noticed is the major improvement in gaming performance, then things like this [youtube.com] happen.
Re:Shoot, there goes my Irish Coffee. Is Decafe ok (Score:5, Insightful)
Potential disaster or not, as long as people are making an informed and deliberate choice I fail to see the need for government action.
Possibly because the informed part is often missing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you saying that people have no idea that they're imbibing concoctions that contain alcohol and caffeine, and that they further have no idea of the effects of those chemicals? That knowledge is the whole reason the stuff sells.
No. People buying these drinks know they have "an effect" Usually an enjoyable one at first. They do not necessarily think about that effect when pouring it down their neck. Or what happens to them when they drink a large number of these drinks.
People in their late teens/early 20s do not have a great reputation for considerd actions when in a group, vying for each other to show how much more they can drink than their friends. Perhaps it's a cultural thing, but I doubt there is that much difference between y
Re: (Score:2)
My own informal research done in bars among friends who enjoy drinks like this, heart palpitations aren't unusual after a few vodka/redbulls or jager bombs. Mixing a moderate stimulant with a strong depressant just spells disaster.
I'd imagine you'd have issues with heart palpitations after a few redbulls even without the vodka or jager. I would imagine alcohol probably reduces their judgement, and people maybe don't think "gee I've just shotgunned 4 energy drinks maybe I should slow down"
Re: (Score:2)
Kahlua might skirt around the definition of "food additive" because its caffeine isn't actually specifically added? Hard to say for sure, but it's plausible that having caffeine because the drink includes coffee is legally distinct from adding synthetic caffeine, as most energy drinks do.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that makes sense. And I doubt the amount of caffeine in a typical serving of Kahlua is significant. I certainly don't feel any more awake after I've had it. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Requiring premarket approval does not mean it is banned, just that you need approval. Before you market it.
Re: (Score:2)
Gonna have to take your word on that; but, my friend has said for years that Red Bull (no alcohol added) tastes like "sweetness and strange".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Ignoring the legalities of this, and focusing on the identified risk, decaf would be OK.
The problem as identified in the article, if I read it correctly, is that drinking megacaf beverages with large amounts of alcohol basically puts you in an "inebriated and energized" state. In other words, when you get completely falling-down drunk, the caffeine only mitigates the "falling down" part. It prevents you from passing out when passing out is a damned fine defense mechanism that keeps you from doing somethin
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, it's pretty weird to read that the combination of caffeine and alcohol is not "generally recognized as safe". For how many centuries do you suppose people have been drinking Irish coffee?
Re:Shoot, there goes my Irish Coffee. Is Decafe ok (Score:4, Informative)
Less than one. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? They aren't "criminalizing drugs", they're just applying the normal regulatory process to commercial mass producers. This is what they're supposed to do.
It's perfectly fine to mix such drinks yourself, or have the bartender mix them for you...
Re: (Score:2)
Eh? They aren't "criminalizing drugs", they're just applying the normal regulatory process to commercial mass producers. This is what they're supposed to do.
Which makes me wonder why more aspects of society don't operate under a default assumption that [chemical/additive] is unsafe until proven otherwise.
The names alone should be enough for a ban (Score:2)
Liquid Charge, Max Fury, Hard Wired, Vicious Vodka ... Anyone who sells stuff with names like that deserves to be shut down. Of course, anyone who buys the stuff deserves whatever happens to them, so maybe they should stay on the market. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not particularly novel. Hurricane and Colt 45 (Lando Calrissian's beer of choice) are both "malt liquors".
Rum and coke (Score:2)
Re:Rum and coke (Score:5, Insightful)
How long has this been around? Probably as long as coke. So now they think it should be made illegal. Idiots.
No, sorry, the summary is really short on vital information. Rum'n'cokes are not on trial here. There is a standard called GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) that can be met, and rum'n'cokes fit this standard. And no one "thinks they should be illegal" - this is an announcement of a start of an investigation, not an announcement of a new law. That investigation MAY lead to a law, but it may not.
These are NOT rum'n'cokes they are talking about. "Sparks" (a Miller/Coors product), one of the products that is being reformulated, had as much alcohol as a can of beer but as much caffeine as a "stay awake" pill. The proportion of alcohol to caffeine is the issue. Think "rum'n'coke with a 'no-doz' pill chaser". Have a half-dozen of them and the caffeine will have you so hyped up you'll feel normal, or damned near it. A half a dozen rum'n'cokes would put you under the table - a half dozen of these little beauties would have you driving through the front door of the bar into the table while convinced that was your garage. Your coordination and function is shot to shit but you have enough energy to feel normal.
This is largely the same risk as people mixing Red Bull with alcohol, except in this case breweries are setting the proportions. You can't regulate stupid - college kids will always do stupid things like this - but at issue here is whether to ask companies to refrain from making this proportion intentionally. Faced with the evidence in the investigation, several manufacturers have voluntarily (as in, not under coercion from the Government) discontinued this class of caffeinated alcoholic beverages because of the possibility of accidental abuse due to the fact that the caffeine-to-alcohol ratio in these beverages tends to conceal the effects of the alcohol.
I'm not totally in favor of laws like this, but this isn't a law. At least not yet. It's an investigation that may or may not lead to a law. At that point, I'm still not sure about a law, but at least the risks would be identified and documented. Then manufacturers would probably just pull the product based on the information given before a law was even passed (and some of them already did!).
Jack and Coke? (Score:3, Interesting)
Since Coke is probably the single most common dark mixer, a lot of bartenders are going to be peeved over this one.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Most of the drinks in question are not the functional equivalent of a rum and coke. We're talking more along the lines of a no-doze with a shot of rum as a chaser.
Thanks, you pushed me to look up the numbers [energyfiend.com].
Bud Extra seems to have 54mg of caffeine in a 10-oz can (CSPI settlement document.)
A No-Doze has 200mg of caffeine.
Coke Classic is 2.8mg/oz, or in a half-can mixed drink 16.8mg, so that's indeed not equivalent.
However, drip coffee is 18.1mg/oz (I know, overly precise for an average).
The top two google r
No more Ice Breakers!? (Score:3, Funny)
1.5 oz Vodka
0.5 oz Cassis
4 oz Energy Drink of your choice (I prefer NoFear or Amp in mine)
4 oz Pineapple Juice
Shake with ice, serve on the rocks in a martini glass.
Come and get me, coppers!
The War on Drugs just got dumberer (Score:5, Funny)
Soon, we'll be smoking weed in a bar wondering how we can score some Jack & Coke.
The War on Drugs just got smarterer (Score:2)
Actually, I think this is the right way to determine legality of drugs. (And alcohol and caffeine are certainly drugs.) Determine whether a reasonable person can use the drug with a high confidence of safety. If yes, the drug is legal. If no, the drug is illegal for reasons of public health and safety.
Jack and Coke are two consumables that are reasonably safe in their separate forms. If you mix them together then indeed you have alcohol and caffeine, but each active ingredient is more dilute than before. Th
correlation, causation... same difference (Score:2)
causality is overrated anyway
Just try and take my Espresso Stout away!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The truly awful thing is that, if this kind of law was enacted, the drinks it would actually kill would be wonderful, rich microbrew espresso stouts and imperial coffee stouts. Outlaw Coors Light if you must, but DO NOT FUCK WITH GOOD BEER.
Finally, the most damning argument against this sort of law of all is that stupid frat boys and girls will still wind up doing stupid things no matter what they're drinking. So what's the point eh?
Re:Just try and take my Espresso Stout away!!! (Score:5, Informative)
I don't see what all the commotion is about. We know how science works, and that is exactly what the FDA is trying to do. They assume the null hypothesis (new products may be unsafe) until proven otherwise- or at least until they know the risks and can make in informed decision. These manufacturers knew they had to get FDA approval, but didn't. This wouldn't be a problem if the beer companies did their homework.
Most importantly, the FDA is saying it is illegal to make these products without approval not to make these products at all, ever. If the mix is as safe as people believe it to be, there won't be a problem.
Re: (Score:2)
For those that can't be bothered to read TFA: They are looking into banning the addition of caffeine to alcoholic drinks. They have said nothing about banning the use of coffee as an ingredient.
Pan-galactic Gargle Blaster (Score:3, Funny)
No caffeine, so it's safe (kinda).
Re: (Score:2)
Nevertheless, it still violates several treaties. [slashdot.org]
change the packaging (Score:2)
Absolute Truth (Score:4, Insightful)
Though I don't think it's any business of the FDA.
Is it too much to ask for a society that lets people make their own mistakes? Must we be hemmed in by the moral and ethical mistakes of the stupidest amongst us? How long must the law protect us from ourselves? Have you as a public been fooled into thinking I'm unaware of the dangers of smoking, carousing, and general debauchery? I assure I'm well aware, and I don't care. Please stop making thing illegal for my own good. I'm old enough to choose to make my own mistakes. As should you be.
Re:Absolute Truth (Score:4, Insightful)
It wasn't too long ago when the dangers of smoking or fast food weren't made aware to everybody. Some smoking ads advertised the health benefits of smoking. It's because of government intervention and regulation that you have the information you currently have, and are fully aware you're destroying your lungs and will most likely die of cancer far earlier than you would have otherwise by smoking. What makes the FDA looking into the dangers of smoking any different than the FDA looking into the dangers of caffeine mixed with alcohol? Do you trust your friendly, neighborhood, multinational alcohol corporation that much as to have them advise you of the health risks of the drinks they're trying to sell you? Making your own mistakes are one thing... having information about my health being deliberately hidden so that some corporation can make a few million dollars off of killing me is another thing altogether.
What's the point.... (Score:4, Funny)
Correlation does not impy causation (Score:4, Interesting)
So I read the article about the reports of negative effects. They surveyed college students, and a result (for example) was that students who mixed energy drinks and alcohol were more likely to ride with a drunk driver. Or put another way, students who rode with a drunk driver were more likely to mix energy drinks and alcohol. Maybe riding with a drunk driver gives a person cravings for energy drinks mixed with alcohol. Or maybe People who are stupid or have poor regard for their own health and safety are likely to make multiple bad decisions, like riding with a drunk driver and mixing energy drinks and alcohol.
I'm not saying mixing energy drinks and alcohol is not bad, I'm sure it is, I'm just saying the study may be flawed.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, you beat me to it.
Long live Buzz Beer! :)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Beer mixed with coffee sounds quite horrible. In fact, anything mixed with beer does.
Only vodka and such pure liquors are good for mixing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lager + Lime juice + a little salt = Michelada (chilli powder optional)
It's a lot more refreshing than straight beer and great when you are on the beach
Re: (Score:2)
There's actually quite a few porters and stouts brewed with coffee, e.g. example A [ratebeer.com], example B [ratebeer.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Does this remind anyone of the Drew Carey show, with their concoction of coffee and beer? Buzz Beer!
The concept is intriguing, but... it sounds like it'd taste pretty vile...
Re: (Score:2)
It just turned up here. That said slashcode is a bit flaky now. Occasionally it gives me a front page with the last five or so articles removed. Maybe it gave you a preview for some reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Seeing as his and some other first posters posts are dated Saturday November 14, @09:07PM , and the articles November 15, @05:36AM (when I saw it too), maybe it was available earlier too.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
As my evangelical Sparks drinking friend used to say, "The alcohol needed to come up with bad ideas, and the energy required to follow through with them".
He checks the Sparks present in all the liquor stores he goes into to see if they still have the Old Label, thus still containing the original recipe... Still fairly common here in San Francisco
Re: (Score:2)
That might have something to do with that most people have been trained "don't mix uppers with downers." So, I'd say this falls under the category of people who do stupid things intentionally because they want to be rebellious.
Re: (Score:2)
Enough of that and they will. If you don't spill it first.
Yeah, baby! (Score:3, Interesting)
As we all know, absinthe doth make the tart grow fonder.
Cheers,
Dave
Re:Misrepresentation of data! (Score:5, Informative)
Correlation is not causation! Wake up!!
Gee, thank you sir for debunking the "non scientific" study you fail to quote with - your gut feeling. I am enlightened.
On the other hand, as a doctor I can tell you that caffeine and taurine belong to the group of drugs called xanthines, whose pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic effects are very well known. Alcohol has also been studied intensively, to such a point where we know its myriad effects on the human body on a molecular level.
Now while we haven't actually asked for volunteers to submit themselves to studies where we try to kill them with a combination of xanthines and ethanol, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to look at the effects of both classes of drugs and see potential problems, especially in the areas of cardiac dysrhythmias, electrolyte imbalances, the dehydrating effect of both drugs, and the psychoactive effects of both drugs.
But I know that since you are incredibly wise, you have considered all the studies involved in all of the above, and have a pointed argument backed by clinically controlled trials to lay the foundation of your claims.
Correlation isn't causation, but do realize that when you have an avian that floats on water and quacks, you are probably observing a duck.