Home / Blogs / Business / The Bulletin
Follow this blog:
RSS

Possible Monster Energy deaths: Should energy drinks be regulated?

By | October 22, 2012, 9:04 PM PDT

Caffeine-filled energy drinks are one of the fastest-growing sectors of the beverage industry, but an inquiry by the Food and Drug Administration into fatalities and health risks from Monster Energy drinks could put a halt to that.

The FDA is looking into whether Monster Energy drinks played a role in five deaths since 2009, though the agency emphasized that there is no evidence that the drinks caused the deaths.

The FDA reports were obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by the mother of a 14-year-old Maryland girl, Anais Fournier, who died last year from a heart arrhythmia after she drank two 24-ounce cans of Monster Energy two days in a row.

The mother, Wendy Crossland, is suing the company for negligence and wrongful death, accusing it of failing to warn consumers about the drinks’ health risks.

The company said last week its products did not cause the girl’s death, but the company’s stock slid 14% in trading Monday.

The New York Times reports:

In an interview, an F.D.A. spokeswoman, Shelly Burgess, said the agency had received reports of five deaths with possible links to the drink as well as a report of a nonfatal heart attack. Additional incident reports referred to other adverse events such as abdominal pain, vomiting, tremors and abnormal heart rate. The reports disclosed cover a period of 2004 to June of this year, but all the deaths occurred in 2009 or later.

The release of these reports could prompt Congress to call for more regulation of energy drinks, whose rapid growth included a 16% jump in sales last year to $8.9 billion. Energy drinks include Monster Energy, Red Bull, Rock Star and energy “shots” such as 5-hour Energy, which are marketed mainly to teenagers and young adults.

Currently, energy drink companies are not required to disclose the caffeine levels of their drinks, which are often marketed as dietary supplements, but labels on Monster Beverage drinks state that they are “not recommended” for children (under 12) and people “sensitive” to caffeine. A 24-ounce can of Monster Energy contains 240 milligrams of caffeine.

What do you think? Should such drinks should come with warning labels? Or is it too soon to say?

Related on SmartPlanet:

via: The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal

photo: Simon le nippon/Flickr

Start your week smarter with our weekly e-mail newsletter. It's your cheat sheet for good ideas. Get it.

Laura Shin

About Laura Shin

Laura Shin is a contributing editor for SmartPlanet.

Laura Shin

Laura Shin

Contributing Editor

Laura Shin has written for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, Audubon and SolveClimate.com. She is currently a senior editor at LearnVest.com. Previously, she worked at Newsweek, the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. She holds degrees from Stanford University and Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism.

Follow her on Twitter.

Laura Shin

Laura Shin

In the unlikely event that Laura has a professional or financial relationship with a company she writes about, it will be prominently disclosed.

She writes for SmartPlanet and is not an employee of CBS.

If you liked this, don't miss...
37
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Follow via:
RSS
-1 Votes
+ -
Energy Drinks - Why ?
Quite why anyone drinks high caffeine, high sugar, horrible tasting drinks with natural extracts of dubious benefit is beyond me. Esp. when a standard can of Red Bull will rob you of GBP1, or more.

Energy drinks are an pseudo-science off-shoot of questionable benefits 'science' of Sports Drinks, where the best drink to Rehydrate/re-electrolyte you is simply skimmed milk.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
Updated - 23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Energy Drinks
Sports drinks like Gatorade serve a different purpose than energy drinks. Energy drinks are usually used to boost short term performance-some runners have been drinking coffee or tea to enhance performance for some time now, energy drinks offer a different way to do this-there are sugar free versions of most energy drinks to address concerns with high sugar consumption. As with most things relating to nutrition, it's a balancing act as too much caffeine can hurt performance-and even for those not exerting themselves physically, there can be the "crash". As for drinking skimmed milk, many adults don't tolerate dairy products well. In the end you have to find what products work for you, what you enjoy drinking and as others have said, read the labels.
Posted by GMC262
23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Healthy Energy Drink Alternative!
VEMMA And VERVE Healthy Energy!
The original superfruit in a super formula
Posted by MatthewCANADA
23rd Dec
+5 Votes
+ -
Seriously, people?
Looking at a can of Monster Rehab (lemonade/tea one), there is a warning label that pretty simply says 'don't overdo it'... for those who want details 'Consume Responsibly - Max 1 can every 4 hours, not to exceed 3 a day'.. blah blah blah...

So technically, there is a warning label.. Just because people these days are idiots, have little idea of self control (Look at facebook if you REALLY need proof of this), and the general idea of people don't need to police themselves because 'big brother' or whomever will do it for you.

These warning labels are you're basic common sense, and there should be no need for them. The main reason that they are there are because some grade-A moron didn't think.... period... and used a product in an amazingly boneheaded way. Do we REALLY need a tag on an electrical device that says 'do not use in the bathtub... REALLY?

Focus on what needs regulations. the government, corporations (not their products, the C*O's, etc), and things that are more rapidly killing our country than energy drinks.
Posted by jonrosen
23rd Oct
+5 Votes
+ -
Agreed
Obviously, common sense is no longer common.
Using litigation to replace the lack of common sense is not the solution.
.... interesting times indeed ....
Posted by da philster
23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
This article needs some form of comparison
Is 240mg of caffeine a dangerous quantity to consume in a 24 oz drink? This article might have greater credibility if the writer had explained that a 24 oz can of an energy drink is roughly four times more in volume than a standard cup of coffee but the caffeine content would only be the equivalent of roughly one and half to two cups of brewed coffee (depending on strength).

Perhaps the real difference is that if one were to consume say, four cans over the course of a day, that cold equate to 7 or eight cups of coffee; probably only dangerous to people predisposed to caffeine incompatibility.
Posted by alienvisitor
23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Drinks full of other crap too
These drinks are loaded full of sugar and other 'natural extract' crap of questionable value, spun as Pseudo-science 'energy' drinks.

Don't forget caffeine is also used as a in many medicines too - commonly pain medication and cold remedies.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Think people
If the caffeine is added it's amount should be listed. However, parents need to get a clue. Every parent I know gets frustrated when grandparents or aunts and uncles return their kids sugared up, but then they turn around and allow them to have drinks that are known to be high in caffeine.
Posted by jackonell
23rd Oct
-2 Votes
+ -
Need to have age restrictions
I believe there needs to be age restrictions on Energy Drinks like there are for tobacco and alcohol. I am a father of 2 teenage boys 15 & 13 and I can lecture until I'm blue in the face but when they can ride their bikes down to the local convenience store and buy a huge can of Monster as young as 10 it does no good. If there ever was a law on the ballot to set the age to 18 I would vote yes.
Posted by jmurray@...
23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
child's and parent's fault: it says right on the can.
"NOT RECCOMMENDED FOR CHILDREN". The death is completely the fault of the parents who failed to instruct, supervise, and discipline the child to avoid such drinks. Failed to investigate the products the child was permitted to buy. If the child was instructed to avoid such drinks and consumed them anyway, then the child is at fault for the death. Now the manufacturer is being sued. As usual, ignorant and foolish people, especially parents who have not supervised and disciplined their children, will try to find someone else to blame and a way to turn an unfortunate event into money to ease their consciences. It is a fact of nature that fingers always point away from the body, do they not? The case against the manufacturer has no merit and the manufacturer bears no moral responsibility. The parents and possibly a disobedient child are responsible for this wrongful death. If the product is really harmful, it should be prohibited. This is not harsh, it is reason niether hard nor soft.
Posted by opcom
23rd Oct
-2 Votes
+ -
Homeopathy not good,
but energy drinks OK? Does anyone else see something wrong with this picture? There is a hunt which for homeopathic remedies, which to my limited knowledge has never ill-effected anyone but energy drinks are not overseen by the FDA? And to make the irony even harsher, it takes 3 years to look into alleged deaths? My, what a fine mess we have. Has anyone ever looked at those who sit at the board of the FDA? No more questions to be asked after that...
Posted by 33Nick
Updated - 23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Homeopathic is a con
Homeopathy is bonkers science, preying on the stupid, that will never work as there is no active ingredient to do anything. That's why is has never adversely affected anyone, with the exception of delaying proper medical intervention.

It's as barking mad as Religion and basing your life on Sky Faries.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
23rd Oct
-2 Votes
+ -
Vaccines are homeopathy
I agree that much of the herbal health care field is pseudo-science because most of it lacks scientific proof as neither the proponents or opponents of it will fund research. Vaccines are homeopathy and they work so therefore homeopathy must be real. Of course not all vaccines tried have worked so not all homeopathic remedies will work.

The more sweeping the statement the more wrong it is.
Posted by shaunehunter
23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
You fundamentally do not understand Homeopathy
From your statement, you fundamentally do not understand how homeopathy 'works'.

It is quackery

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homeopathy

Vaccines are based on quality evidence based research and practice.
Posted by neil.postlethwaite@...
23rd Oct
-4 Votes
+ -
This crap is posion
This stuff is posion, Obama got rid of the Big Gulp and Clove cigs this is worst than both combined where is our socialist govenment when we need them?
Posted by jpwalkerjr
23rd Oct
+2 Votes
+ -
Confusion
I think you've confused the President with the mayor of NYC.
Bloomberg is a republican the last I checked and he is the one that has outlawed any soft drinks over 16 oz. as well as a campaign against flavored cigarettes.
Posted by harrim47
23rd Oct
-2 Votes
+ -
caffeinated energy drinks
I have been drinking B-vitamin fortified sugar-free energy drinks (Celsius and Twinlab energy drinks have a little caffeine), and have to get them by mail-order. The stores only get the stuff that appeals to kids - they think mine taste gross, at first. I think an age restriction would go a long way towards safer kids. Or taxing it out of a kids' budget, have you noticed the cost of a "serving"???
Posted by aniaksdh
23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Christopher Walken
To quote Christopher Walken in his latest movie..
"No..."

What we *DO* need to regulate is stupid parents! How are children (people at 14 years of age are still children, right?)
How are Children getting their hands on this stuff?
My parents aren't that strict, but as a child, I knew that certain adult activities were not for children...this included smoking, drinking coffee, or alcohol, drinking sodas, driving cars, staying up past 11pm. These were things that children just didn't do...and if you *WERE* a child who did these things, then you were one of those *bad* kids that your parents told you who are up to no good and nothing good will come of them. These children steal, lie and cheat and break their parent's hearts...So yeah...good kids don't do these "bad" things...only bad kids...
Posted by tech_ed@...
23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
The 'smart'
trying to tell the 'dumb' how to be 'smart'. Humans
come in many flavors; we really need to look out
for everybody. Absent-minded actors too.
Posted by bill1514@...
23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
how do we regulate parents?
How do we regulate parents, other than putting warning labels on things that they don't have the common sense to restrict their children to? I know its hard for the privileged to believe, but I think some parents out there really don't KNOW that these drinks a. have caffeine, or b. that caffeine is bad for you. Hard to believe, but watching one episode of the shows about kids in beauty pageants will tell you this is true. Manufacturers who are putting dangerous amounts of chemicals in drinks if they are consumed more than one at a time, or more than once in TWO DAYS should have legal obligations to warn people of this, since the reality is the DON'T know.
Posted by tassiac
26th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Jon has a point, but...
"Teenagers and young adults" complicate this issue greatly.
You really don't want to invoke Darwin for this group. Most
grow up and become responsible. And I don't want caffeine
gone altogether. Warning labels are necessary to protect
both sides of the issue; ie, the group of irresponsible buyers
AND the companies who make this stuff. "WARNING, don't
stick your foot under the lawnmower, even when it's not
running", some folks need that message. Even you and I
need to be reminded that feet under lawnmowers is NEVER
a good idea. And overdoseing on caffeine is just natural
for some folks to try; and this is where it becomes a medical
issue if the warning is there. Otherwise, if there is no warning
label, it becomes a medical issue AND a lawsuit. Big hunks
of highly radioactive ore don't come with warning labels, but
most consumer items need a "read me first".
Posted by bill1514@...
23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Darwin
Actually, you *do* want to invoke Darwin on these kids. Weed out the dumb ones *before* they can reproduce. Harsh, but that's the way it is.
Posted by jred
25th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
FDA needs revamping
The FDA was originated in order to ensure that what you bought was what you got.

Somewhere along the way, this got lost, and now there's lots of holes in 'having to reveal' what's in your product, and another bunch of added rules about 'safe & effective.'

It's no trouble for manufacturers to reveal exactly how much and which substances are in their products destined for human consumption or application to the body...the information is easy to obtain using modern analysis.

'Safe' or 'effective' are another thing altogether...levels of something safe for you might kill someone else, and effectivity is difficult to measure, since in few cases is the effectiveness of a compound 100% or definitively established.

Warning labels are important, but get real, the amount of advertising and the emotional responses it produces far outweighs the effect of any warning...that's why we eliminated tobacco advertising.

The vast majority of the cost of soft drinks, water, wine & beer is the cost of convincing you to buy the product. Without advertising, you probably would buy considerably less of these products, and in every case, that would be better for you, me, our environment and the rest of life on the planet.

Capitalism without controls, is mere theft.

We do owe it to ourselves and our society, to prohibit products which simply aren't good for us either individually or as a society. Highly caffienated products in general are not particularily healthy for individuals or society...they promote poor decision making every bit as much as alcohol or other drugs. Such substance abuse needs to be reduced...my Senator or President is permitted by law to make major decisions under the influence of any substance...there are no controls on substance abuse in high office. Does this make an sense at all? The President or Congress can be high as a kite and declare war or taxes, and there's nothing to prevent it.
Posted by wizoddg
23rd Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Energy drink controversy
Have seen in Belize, where I live, a budding young upcoming television reporter and journalist who also found dead after consuming an energy drink. He was buried and no further inquiries were made but it always stuck in my mind that an energy drink was responsible for his untimely death because of an empty can that was found near his bedside. The amount of variables involved here is also very wide but think that your F.D.A. should do some research and put warning labels on these beverages should the facts warrant or deem it necessary. Really, I have no faith in this lot who readily bend and bow to the dictates of the powerful lobbies who make sure that congress protect the interests of these companies. Don't think it necessarily have to be the caffeine content either. There is a long list of other compounds like maca and guarana in these drinks, to just name a few from memory, that may also cause or trigger adverse cardiovascular events in certain people who may not even be aware that they may be susceptible to them. At least in your country you have the recourse of the courts and a whole lot of greedy lawyers on both sides. All can remember down here is a grieving and heart-broken mom who it probably never crossed her mind that the innocuous empty energy drink can may have held some answers for her son's untimely death.
Posted by markmcf@...
23rd Oct
-2 Votes
+ -
Confederacy of Dunces
This web site and SHAM-O-CRACY OF DUNCES should be renamed: NOT SO SMART PLANET....chimps have more smarts than we do just look at what they've managed to accomplish in Washington, District of Criminals. The End, bubye!
Posted by BigMikeyZ
23rd Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Am I the only one that noticed...
...that the girl in question died after drinking only two of these over two days? The amount of caffeine she consumed was nowhere near lethal for normal, healthy teenagers.

In all likelihood, she had some sort of diagnosed heart defect. If she hadn't died after consuming the Monster drink, she likely would have died of something else at some point in the not-so-distant future.

Every year, several-times more kids drop dead participating in high school athletics. Are we going to outlaw those as well?
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 24th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
You're right
Hi,

You're right that she had an existing medical problem. It was an error on my part not to mention it. Here's what the NYT says:

The lawsuit filed last week on behalf of the teenager referred to autopsy and medical examiner reports that said she had died of cardiac arrhythmia due to caffeine toxicity that had exacerbated an existing heart problem. The report also showed that the teenager had Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, which can affect the bodys connective tissue, including blood vessels. A lawyer for her family, Kevin Goldberg, said that the 14-year-old had been aware she had an underlying heart condition but added that her doctors had not told her to restrict her physical activities or her caffeine use.

Laura
Posted by laurashin
25th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
There you go then.
A tragedy? Certainly. But was Monster really responsible for her death? There are probably a thousand other consumer products out there that would have proven just as lethal to this young girl.

Perhaps if Monster sold itself as some sort of "health tonic", the girl's family might have a case. But that's hardly Monster's image. Monster's packaging and marketing clearly promotes it as an "edgy" product.

Personally, if I had been diagnosed with the kind of issues this girl had, I'd avoid products such as Monster. (I'm personally quite healthy, and I avoid products like this anyway) But we also know that teenager's ability to assess risk is marginal to non-existent, as it clearly was in this case. Was this Monster's fault? The court will decide.

Personally, I'm willing to bet that Monster will prevail.

As for the "should they be regulated" issue; I've already said that if we're going to regulate Monster-like drinks on the basis of 5 deaths per year (and most of those deaths were due to extreme circumstances) then there are probably thousands of other products/activities we should be regulating as well that are killing far more people.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
26th Oct
-1 Votes
+ -
To JohnMcGrew and others w/o facts
First of all, the report shows that the girl drank two 24 oz cans within 1 24 hour period. That's more than anyone should drink.
As for the rest of the audience who cannot see past this opportunity for the legal system to abuse competent individuals through those who cannot perceive a modality of responsibility for self and the consequences of the choices you make (including how you raise your children), c'mon, are you people serious? I have made two tiny URLs to debunk this hype. Please Read:
http://tinyurl/coffee-bad
http://tinyurl/energy-good
Posted by sivadm
24th Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
Here are the facts we do have.
I'm not arguing that such drinks are the least bit safe.

But the FDA only considers doses of over 5000mg as potentially lethal. That would be 31 cans of Monster. The girl in question drank 2 cans within 24 hours.

Clearly, something else was wrong.

Twice as many people die per year due to peanut allergies than caffeine drinks. We haven't outlawed peanut butter yet.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
Updated - 24th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Let me apologize, then
I might have read your post more subjectively than objectively. This may be because I drink 2 a day: one Java Monster and one Monster Rehab Orangeade. These are both 16 oz cans and have done me pretty good for the day in both labor intensive and focus intensive positions (the latter is the current situation and now I am more likely to only drink one. I was taking into account what I know about the variables in human beings. I cannot base what someone else should or needs to do based on my life, I can only gauge by my life, and from that gauge I was responding to your nowhere near lethal comment. That, which I agree with, must not be the standard that we judge all cases because of instances such as this. As you said, clearly, something else was wrong.
Another point on this topic is the rate by which Monster has advanced. It does have less caffeine than others on the market by volume, even that of coffee. I like it because of the vitamins in it. Rehab has "super food" berries as ingredients and has only 10 calories per serving and therefore little sugar. Red Bull came out in 1987, Monster Energy was introduced in 2002. I read somewhere that Red Bull has 30% of the energy drink market, Monster Energy has 35%. WHOA! I wonder if the lawyer filing the case against monster has any ties with Red Bull... If I had a product that was being beaten so badly but I had no way of implicating that there was something wrong in their product directly (which cannot be done because it would be a conflict of interest) I would jump on any event in which the opponents product was less than superior.

Another fact for you: Monster tastes better than the others! No one wants to drink something that tastes like a dissolved multivitamin mixed with a hint of some chemical, what I can only imagine is the taste of the caffeine itself.
Posted by sivadm
24th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Since I don't consume any of these beverages...
...I really can't render an opinion as to their taste.

But since their explicit sales point is to chemically alter my state of being instead to merely quench thirst, I am naturally adverse to them. Do I think they should be outlawed or otherwise regulated? I don't think so. Like I said, more people die from peanut butter.

I think the "bath salts" issue is far more urgent.
Posted by JohnMcGrew@...
24th Oct
+1 Vote
+ -
And they make you talk really, really fast....
And type, type, type.................
Posted by seniorfrog52@...
25th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
Whole damn bag of salt....
Have you tasted these drinks? Tastes and smells like a moldy coffee filter. Probably not some thing you'd try twice if your brain wasn't looking for a kick start.

Warning: Consumption of a bag of salt may be hazardous to your health. Duh.

Sure let's get Congress involved over 5 possible deaths.
Afghanistan? Hello!
Posted by seniorfrog52@...
25th Oct
0 Votes
+ -
energy drinks
Energy drinks should definitely be regulated. As a teacher, i see children as young as 12 starting their day with these horrible drinks. The processed foods leading to diabetic complications http://diabetesfeet.wordpress.com/2012/11/01/diabetes-feet-swollen-what-you-must-do/ and obesity. The combination of junk food and energy drinks is a disaster. No one under 18 should be able to buy these drinks. And even adult purchases should be regulated.
Posted by PrettyOldlady
7th Nov
0 Votes
+ -
Typical statist response
"And even adult purchases should be regulated."

Yes, if there is a problem with a product, let's just have government regulate it. In a free society, people persuade. In an unfree society, people are forced to do what government tells them to do. They have no choice, and choice is the essence of freedom.

However, since government is force, every busy-body and do-gooder goes running to it, seeking new laws and new regulations to legislate other people's lives. Persuasion is just too hard and takes too long, and people just might choose not to do what the busy-bodies want them to do.

You are an educator. You can influence children and parents to make the right choices without requiring that every citizen be infantilized.
Posted by sissy sue
Updated - 8th Nov
0 Votes
+ -
THE Healthy Energy Drink Alternative!
VEMMA And VERVE Healthy Energy!
The original superfruit in a super formula
Posted by MatthewCANADA
23rd Dec
Join the conversation
Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]

Join the SmartPlanet community and join the conversation! Signing up is fast and free. Don't wait -- we want to hear your opinion!

Join Login

Keep Up with SmartPlanet

SmartPlanet Weekly Newsletter
SmartPlanet Weekly Newsletter

Facebook Activity

View Results

Quick Poll

Where do you believe consumers are in their adoption of the cloud?

View Results

Blog Archive