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.
