Alcohol energy drinks come under fire; caffeine next?
August 27, 2007 – 11:10 am
“A letter from nearly 30 attorneys general sent to federal officials to investigate the ingredients and marketing of alcoholic energy drinks this week will likely prompt greater scrutiny of those products, experts said yesterday.” [ via Promo Magazine]
AdAge also posted a story: State Attorneys General Attack Marketing of Alcoholic Energy Drinks
Aggressive campaigns
The letter noted that nonalcoholic energy drinks have grown rapidly in popularity, especially with teens, and it argued that the alcoholic energy drinks are essentially exploiting that phenomenon. “Alcoholic beverage manufacturers have taken advantage of the youth appeal by engaging in aggressive marketing campaigns,” the letter reads. “These campaigns claim that such beverages increase a person’s stamina or energy level. However, they do not mention the potentially severe, adverse consequences of mixing caffeine with alcohol.”
When will consumers and parents shoulder some of the responsibility as well?
“The group in February targeted the No. 1 brewer’s pioneering online TV network, Bud.TV, over what it called insufficient age-verification measures. The site did require users to enter personal information that could be verified by a database of state-issued identification cards, which is actually well beyond what most brewers use online. But the AGs said that, as a network operator, A-B had more responsibility to keep youth away from its marketing than it did as a mere advertiser.
Six months later, Bud.TV’s age verification remains unchanged, and is frequently cited as a reason the site has struggled to attract a large audience.”
Why did Budweiser get targeted for “insufficient age-verification” while adult sites run rampant on the internet with little verification of age? I think A-B took as many precautions as they could have in the situation, which ultimately lead to the demise of the project.
This reminds me of the Cocaine Energy Drink which came under fire a few months ago. Redux Beverages pulled the energy drink it dubbed Cocaine from stores nationwide.
The Food and Drug Administration issued a warning letter that said Redux was illegally marketing the drink as a street-drug alternative and a dietary supplement. May 4 was the deadline for the company to respond. The FDA cited the drink’s labeling and Web site, which included the statements “Speed in a Can” and “Cocaine–Instant Rush.” Redux says Cocaine contains no drugs and is marketed as an energy drink.
Redux would like to keep the name Cocaine because it fits with the company’s tongue-in-cheek approach. “We like to think we have a great sense of humor,” says partner Clegg Ivey.
Vodka & Red Bull is standard fare in most bars and clubs these days, which, from the article, generally has about 10 times the alcohol as malt beverage energy drinks.
I’m surprised they didn’t throw alcopops, which basically resemble soft drinks, into the mix to receive more oversight.
I’m wondering what it will take for caffeine to come under FDA scrutiny. I’m not sure how I’d survive without my 4 shot iced latte.
Technorati Tags: alcohol, energy drink, alcopop, caffeine
2 Responses to “Alcohol energy drinks come under fire; caffeine next?”
“These campaigns claim that such beverages increase a person’s stamina or energy level. However, they do not mention the potentially severe, adverse consequences of mixing caffeine with alcohol.”
Alcohol consumption has the potential to produce “severe” & “adverse” effects when consumed alone before any caffeine is added. The public has been made thoroughly aware of this danger. Unless the company has been making statements that would mislead the public into believing that this new beverage is for some reason exempt from all the warnings that have been previously made then I can’t see how they have done anything wrong.
Also, I want to know if the alleged adverse effects occur when the consumption level is within what the company/industry would recommend as a responsible amount. If the adverse effects only occur once the person has consumed more of the beverage than the company/industry recommends then I think that the company is completely blameless.
By Chris Kammerer on Aug 27, 2007
according to the National Institute of Health, moderate drinking is defined as the following:
There is no one definition of moderate drinking, but generally the term is used to describe low-risk or responsible drinking. According to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (1), drinking in moderation is defined as having no more than 1 drink per day for women and no more than 2 drinks per day for men. This definition is referring to the amount consumed on any single day and is not intended as an average over several days.
Binge drinking is basically anything that would impair your judgment.
The USDA has some interesting notes on alcohol consumption. I won’t go into the good vs. bad drinking discussion, but I will quote the USDA in the following:
The consumption of alcohol can have beneficial or harmful effects depending on the amount consumed, age and other characteristics of the person consuming the alcohol, and specifics of the situation.
By Dustin Jacobsen on Aug 27, 2007