691

Sarah Katz, 21, had a heart condition and was not aware of the drink’s caffeine content, which exceeded that of cans of Red Bull and Monster energy drinks combined, according to a legal filing

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Orionza@lemmy.world 273 points 1 year ago

I hope this lawsuit forces them to remove this. I'm sorry this young girl died. This isn't the first issue they had with this drink. My husband and I were discussing it months ago. He thought it was just lemonade - sugar, water, lemons. We didn't figure out why he was up all night. Later someone old him how much caffeine it has. We had no idea. It's dangerous to those with high bp.

[-] Salamendacious@lemmy.world 134 points 1 year ago

I'm not going to lie when I first read the headline I thought this was probably a frivolous lawsuit but after reading the article I thought that stuff should get pulled.

[-] FoundTheVegan@kbin.social 138 points 1 year ago

It's like that McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit. Poor lady was made a mockery of for ordering hot coffee because it sounds ridiculous at first but she had 2nd degree burns. It was recklessly hot, as was this drink recklessly produced and marketed.

[-] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 123 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

3rd degree groin burns that required grafts.

She initially asked for just 20k to cover her medical bills, and they instead offered like $800.

Also of note, that huge 2.7mil fine the jury found? Just the profits from 2 days of McDonald's coffee sales. The judge reduced it to $650k, but even that likely wasent paid as they settled out of court at that point.

[-] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago

It was also discovered that McDonald's was aware of the danger of serving their coffee that hot, yet they continued to do so because it meant they had to give fewer free refills. If you have to wait 20 minutes for your coffee to cool down before you drink it, you're going to get less refills overall

[-] Misconduct@startrek.website 22 points 1 year ago

The worst part of that is knowing they probably determined it's cheaper to settle injuries than keep it at the temps they were supposed to. I know corporations are soulless money making machines but that always feels extra dark to think about

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Hillock@kbin.social 20 points 1 year ago

The McDonald's lady's case blew up because the jury slapped McDonald's with huge punitive damages. If she would have gotten the 10-30k she asked for initially or even just the 125k for actual damages no one would care about the case. But the 2.7 million in punitive damages just make this lawsuit seem frivolous. But she had no control over that.

And IIRC one big reason why she won was because the cups weren't suited for holding such hot liquid. The temperature of coffee didn't decrease in McDonald's after the lawsuit.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 61 points 1 year ago

I don't mind it existing as a product. If it does though it should be very clearly labeled with warnings that are impossible to miss. This seems great for Panaras on college campuses, but there should be no possibility you confuse it for something else.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I also wasn’t aware. I imagine there were signs, but who looks for the caffeine content of lemonade? In my case I just had a dash t flavor soda, so I didn’t notice until my kid pointed it out

Similarly, when my kids were little, I kept them away from stimulants, but who expects to have to prohibit lemonade for the caffeine hit?

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] FoundTheVegan@kbin.social 120 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

8 months ago Food Theroy did agreat video on this. It's very appropriately titled given the unfortunate circumstances. To say this drink was caffeineted is a major understatement, it was basically four and a half monsters in one cup.

Franky, it was reckless for Panera to make and sell this drink and they absolutely earned this lawsuit. There was pently of forewarning that the abnormally high caffeine content in this was dangerous for certain groups. Hope the family wins big, nothing will bring back their loved one but this could've been avoided with more clear nutrientional warnings.

f u panera

[-] Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 66 points 1 year ago

Why is quadruple Monster even on the menu of a restaurant that is mostly famous for soup?

[-] HeyJoe@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

Because they feel the need to pivot and try to extract more money and bring in other types of people by offering more options for everything. To bad it's all garbage, and very overpriced.

Maybe I am wrong, but there is no way this place can sustain itself with the prices they charge and the drop in quality they now offer compared to early 2000's.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 49 points 1 year ago

The other thing is, these drinks are in the same dispensers, the same location, that used to have regular juices. Even assuming the signs were there, it’s set up for no one to pay attention

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee 97 points 1 year ago

All caffinated beverages should be required to disclose their caffeine content on the packaging.

[-] oxjox@lemmy.ml 58 points 1 year ago

You mean like how Panera Bread does?
https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-560w,f_auto,q_auto:eco,dpr_2.0/rockcms/2023-10/231017-panera-bread-charged-lemonade-al-1019-f1a04a.jpg

The Charged Lemonade was “offered side-by-side with all of Panera’s non-caffeinated and/or less caffeinated drinks” and was advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage that contained as much caffeine as the restaurant’s dark roast coffee, according to photos of both the menu and beverage dispensers in the store, which were included in the wrongful death lawsuit. https://www.panerabread.com/en-us/app/product/57f9b1aa54df4bd2c2eacca55efa1c96.html

Not to disagree with you, you're right, but I think they should also indicate how much is normal consumption. It's quite surprising this isn't something that's required on the nutritional label.

[-] Lemminary@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

they should also indicate how much is normal consumption

For real, this is the actual problem. How much does 390 mg of caffeine even mean to the average person? For reference, one of those 20 oz drinks are almost equivalent to 3 cups of regular black coffee.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Kite@sh.itjust.works 74 points 1 year ago

Welp, this post might have just saved my life. I had no idea, and a heart condition.

[-] Sunroc@lemmy.world 28 points 1 year ago

Yeah, this is really serious. I hope people don't construe this to be an absurd example of over litigation, while it is a completely reasonable case. Kind of like the McDonald's coffee lady getting clowned on when she is a genuine victim.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] jandar_fett@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago

Reporting in after having just come from Panera due to this article. Didn't read article, and it might be click bait or might not. I do know that the drink in question is slapped right beside all the typical juices and sodas, and the label says "contains as much as our dark roast coffee" then below that, even less obvious it gives serving sizes & caffeine amounts. Call me crazy, but I doubt your average consumer is going to consider just how much caffeine might be in LEMONADE.

Panera is definitely losing this one. It could even be argued that they chose a product with that much caffeine and to not really advertise it based on the amounts of caffeine of the 30oz literally being a hair's width away from the potential danger threshold.

[-] cybersandwich@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago

My biggest question is what is the market for this? Who is like: I really want a lemonade but I want it to have more caffeine than a redbull! It seems like such a weird product in general.

If you want caffeine and you are at a bakery, you are going to get a coffee or tea. If you are at a bakery and want lemonade, you probably aren't trying to get 'charged' or else youd just get a coffee or tea.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 51 points 1 year ago

I drank a monster energy once (well, to be precise, about half of one.),back when energy drinks were still relatively new and there wasnt as much common knowledge about them as there is today.

Just that half of a can was enough to make me feel like I was going to die.

My resting heart rate was over 150bpm, was shaking with tremors, and cold sweating. I genuinely thought I was gonna die.

And I have never so much as touched another one, and will never touch another one, for the rest of my life.

They are incredibly dangerous and shouldnt be something any kid or idiot can walk into a store and buy with couple bucks.

and I have absolutely no idea how there are people that exist out there that can drink 6-10 of them a day without spontaneously combusting from tremor induced cellular friction.

[-] Stuka@lemmy.ml 38 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They are not incredibly dangerous, not be a long shot.

They can be dangerous to a very small subset of people with preexisting conditions and that's about it.

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] threeduck@aussie.zone 35 points 1 year ago

There often more caffeine in a standard coffee than half a litre of monster energy drink.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 22 points 1 year ago

I'm guessing that every person is different when it comes to energy drink tolerance, or there might be some underlying conditions. Back when I used to drink energy drinks, I wouldn't really feel anything except for maybe feeling a bit more "energetic" but I'm not sure how much of that is placebo. Granted, I wouldn't drink 6-10 cans a day because I don't think they taste that good, and would only drink a can occasionally.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

Just looking at the photo in the article, it looks clear to me how much caffeine is in it:

Unclear if that's a "before" or "after" photo though.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 66 points 1 year ago

If I saw that, I wouldn't really have any idea how much 260mg of caffeine is, compared to your average espresso shot. IMHO there probably should be some kind of upper limit to the amount of caffeine you can put in a drink (or at least be forced to call it something other than 'lemonade').

[-] glimse@lemmy.world 32 points 1 year ago

Yeah I doubt most coffee/tea/soda drinkers could tell you how much caffeine is in their drinks. 260mg means nothing to me without a baseline

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] doricub@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

Do they have that information on the drive through or the app though?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] wahming 19 points 1 year ago

How visible is that sign from the order counter? Also, visually handicapped customers would have no idea.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[-] neptune@dmv.social 38 points 1 year ago

This new trend of soda that's made of cane sugar and natural coloring is pretty stupid. It's still a ton of calories and acid on your teeth. At Chipotle, cava, Panera, I'll get sparkling water out of the Sprite tap and then flavor with a dash of whatever nu soda they have.

Panera, I feel, is 100% at fault here for trying to make soda and apparently ENERGY DRINKS seem innocuous and healthy.

[-] SeaJ@lemm.ee 38 points 1 year ago

Isn't all soda essentially just sugar and food coloring?

[-] Nudding@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
[-] Katrisia@lemm.ee 29 points 1 year ago

That's insane. I hope not only that they win the lawsuit, but that companies understand stimulants can be harder (even dangerous) on some people.

The way caffeine affects me does not risk my life, but it can get ugly as I have a mental health condition that gets triggered by stimulants. It is so common to rely on caffeine nowadays, and it's present in many beverages and snacks. People forget it is still a drug.

There should be labels and there should be less of a presence of caffeine (and other legal drugs) in unrelated products. I mean, it's normal if coffee has caffeine, it shouldn't be normal that a lemonade has caffeine.

load more comments (37 replies)
[-] NXTR@artemis.camp 23 points 1 year ago

There used to be a product called Redline: White Heat from VPX (same people that make bang with the unhinged CEO). It had to be taken off the market because it had an amphetamine analogue in it called AMP Citrate or DMBA.

One scoop of that stuff made me feel like I was going to die. My friend who took Ritalin at the time told me it was more powerful than any other stimulant he had before.

It’s crazy to think this was openly available at health supplement stores for years before the FDA caught wind.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] Underwaterbob@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

The 30 oz has 390mg of caffeine! That's four regular cups of coffee. I'm a big guy, and that would mess me up.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago

They way I learned Dr. Pepper has caffeine is a friend in high school with a similar undiagnosed condition dying after drinking one.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] BigBlackCockroach@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is so saddening, I can't imagine what her loved ones must be going through. ☹️

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2023
691 points (97.5% liked)

News

23311 readers
1948 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS