Putting Caffeine in Gum is A BAD IDEA, here's why...

With new caffeinated foods popping up, the FDA is getting more pressure to reevaluate the safety of caffeine, particularly for adolescents. This is a terrific news story on NutraIngredients-USA.com:

FDA-to-probe-impact-of-caffeine-on-kids-health-following-launch-of-Wrigley-s-Alert-Energy-Caffeine-Gum

Caffeinated jelly beans and gum is not new, but this concept of adding caffeine to anything and everything is a bad idea. Here's why:

1) Adding caffeine to foods that don't normally have caffeine will make it harder, not easier, for people to regulate their caffeine intake.  If you don't believe me, try keeping track of exactly how many grams of sugar you consume in one day. Too much sugar can be just as detrimental to your health as too much caffeine, but like with "too much fiber", you won't really notice you're pushing your body too far until it's too late to do anything about it.


2) Minors are especially vulnerable to caffeine because for them the safe limit of caffeine intake is so low. It's unfortunately common for news anchors to completely neglect any reference to the limits of caffeine intake for minors. The truth is, while registered dieticians and pediatricians in the US have adopted an unrealistic "zero tolerance" standpoint, Health Canada has identified safe limits for kids of all different ages.

Ode to Heath Canada - Caffeine Safety

 Health Canada's limits on safe caffeine intake are as follows:

• For children:
  • Age 12 and under: no more than 2.5 milligrams of caffeine per kilogram of body weight
  • Age 4-6: 45 mg
  • Age 7-9: 62.5 mg
  • Age 10-12: 85 mg
• For women of childbearing age: no more than 300 mg caffeine/day.
• For healthy adults: no more than 400 mg caffeine/day.

 Please note that the 400 mg caffeine per day for healthy adults is based off the same comprehensive scientific review that the US used to set their daily maximum.

Effects of Caffeine on Human Health - Comprehensive Review

3) Putting caffeine in your product is just ASKING for FDA attention, not to mention angry letters from concerned parents. Caffeine is such a hot-button issue right now, and for good reason. Yes, of course caffeine is safe when used appropriately, but the easier your product makes it to abuse/over-consume caffeine, the brighter the target on your back.

As reported by Greenberg Traurig attorney Justin Prochnow:

FDA Deputy Commissioner Michael R. Taylor cited Wrigley's new Alert gum, which is making its nationwide debut this week, as the catalyst for studying the potential impact that readily-available sources of caffeine could have on the health of minors.

“The only time that FDA explicitly approved the added use of caffeine in a food was for cola, and that was in the 1950s,” Taylor said. “Today, the environment has changed. Children and adolescents may be exposed to caffeine beyond those foods in which caffeine is naturally found and beyond anything FDA envisioned when it made the determination regarding caffeine in cola.”

Taylor said that the FDA will take “appropriate action” it deems necessary to regulate caffeinated products following the investigation.


BOTTOM LINE: Caffeine is safe in moderation, and for kids and teens "moderation" means "almost no caffeine at all". Putting caffeine in normally caffeine-free foods creates a potentially hazardous situation because it makes it easier for someone to consume more than their body can handle.
(think multi-vitamins that look exactly like gummy bears in a jar without a child-safe lid)

The Next Super-fruit: Is May the Month of the Mango?

My Magic 8 Ball tells me mango fruit is about to become the next acai berry, the next pomegranate juice, the next coconut water. Lately several food science and nutrition journals have been reporting the health benefits of this tropical fruit, so it's only a matter of time before popular media catches on. Some call this sudden interest a fad but, regardless, I think anything that gets people excited about eating fruits and vegetables is a good thing.

To truly reap the benefits of this potential phenomenon, look out for these traps:


Trap #1: With any super-fruit, keep in mind that the health benefits discovered in scientific studies  relate to the fruit itself. 
Remember that study that labeled popcorn a healthy snack? That study did NOT involve "Butter Lovers" or "Cheese Explosion" popcorn. When blueberries were touted for their superb content of antioxidants, blueberry muffins went flying off the shelves. There's also the (short-lived) boost in sales for pomegranate flavored vodka after pomegranate was labeled a super-fruit. 
 
Mango Tip #1: Eat a REAL mango.
Mango fruit does offer real health benefits, (as this article discusses: Mango is good for reducing inflammation and for controlling blood sugar ) but eating dried mangoes does not give one the same benefits. Remember when the Center for Science in the Public Interest publicly scolded the Girl Scouts of America for their new Mango Creme Nutri-Fusion cookies? (If you don't, read it here: CSPI awards Badge of Shame to Girl Scouts of America) Granted, the mango cookie was not made with real mangoes and mangoes aren't even part of the "whole food concentrate powder" on the label. Still, are there that many people that actually fall for any claim that eating a Girl Scout cookie is as healthy as eating the real fruit? I'd like to think we know better, we just like eating cookies.

Trap #2: With any super-fruit, the easier it is to consume, the more likely people will consume it. 
Have you ever tried to cut a mango? It's quite the challenge. Even if the most famous daytime TV doctor endorsed mangoes as a miracle fruit, one wonders how many people would be detered by the sheer act of trying to cut the darn thing open.  It was easy for people to hop on the Cranberry Juice wagon because the hardest part is finding a product that's 100% (CRANBERRY) juice.

Mango Tip #2: There is no shame to turning to YouTube to learn how to eat a fruit. 
There are instructional videos  *HERE* (from Mango.org) and *HERE* (from an amazing chef on YouTube) 

Trap #3: With any super-fruit, the health benefits are subject to availability. 
In other words, if you decide to try a mango for the first time in January, your first impression of your New Favorite Fruit could be drastically different than if you'd bought the fruit in May. Any time you're trying a new fruit, you should try to buy it when it's in season to get the best sense of how much you like it. I can't speak for anyone else but I find Cuties not-so cute and delicious in December.

Mango Tip #3: Know when it grows.
There's a phenomenal overview of the different mangoes commonly found in grocery stores, how to tell them apart and when each type is in season *HERE* (It's a Yahoo Answer page).
I've included a synopsis of the mango seasons below:

"You can usually find good mangoes on the market from January through September. The poorest time is toward the end of the year - November and December. Mangoes are good early in the season, but like oranges, they're at the peak of flavor toward the end of the season.

* Mexican mangoes: Peak season begins in late March and lasts through September
* Florida mangoes: May through September
* Haitian mangoes: January through September
* Brazilian mangoes:September through January"


BOTTOM LINE:

Mangoes are delicious and nutritious, and knowing how to navigate these common super-fruit traps will help you reap the benefits of these a-peel-ing tropical fruits.  

Never Argue With A Drunk Or A Fool

They say, “don’t cry over spilled milk” but I’ve never been told not to stand up in defense of it. Do I believe it’s possible to have a healthy diet that does not include milk – yes. Do I believe it’s possible to have a healthy diet that does include milk – YES!

This morning as I was leaving the gym I overheard an exercise instructor telling her clients that they should cut out milk entirely because “it’s just so bad for you” and “we’re the only species that drinks milk from another animal”. To be fair, she prefaced her advice with “I know nutritionists would disagree with me but…”. Isn’t that like prefacing an insult with “No offense but…”?

Overhearing her spew this information she got from who-knows-where, I could hardly contain my desire to speak up. I had to grit my teeth and clench my fists before walking away, not out of anger but out of a desire to contribute to the conversation, to offer my insight. It was not my place to jump into the conversation occurring right beside my locker, but at what point to we ignore conversational etiquette to stand up for what we believe in?

Like Meg Ryan's character in You’ve Got Mail, I think of what I’d like to say only after the moment has passed. If I could go back to that moment, this is what I’d say:

If you really want to help your clients, teach them how to make smart decisions for their lifestyle, teach them about portion control and moderation, teach them how to recognize and handle emotional eating—three things considerably more effective at achieving long term health than telling them to exclude entire groups of food.

I rest my case. 

DUH-Alert: New study shows 'chugging' 1-3 cans of energy drinks is bad for your heart

Research presented to the American Heart Association’s Epidemiology and Prevention/Nutrition, Physical Activity and Metabolism 2013 Scientific Sessions indicates that energy drinks increase blood pressure and disturb the heart's rhythm.

(read the "breaking news' here)

PROBLEM: "researchers checked the QT interval of 93 people who had just chugged one to three cans of energy drinks."

 Once more, the bottom line from the press is "energy drinks are dangerous" instead of "Why the heck are you CHUGGING this product?" and "Don't 'CHUG' even one can of a caffeinated product, let alone three."

We don't 'chug' coffee, do we? It's hot, therefore we typically sip it. Furthermore, how many people have ever ordered three grande coffees just for themselves? How many of those people thought it was a good idea to consume all three grande coffees in less than 5 minutes? That would be weird, right?

I think it's pretty uncommon for people to 'chug' coffee or to consume multiples in a rapid succession, but it's not uncommon for energy drinks. Why isn't this difference in consumption practices being highlighted in the press? If you really want to help someone, News Media, how about reminding them that it's not a good idea to consume anything caffeinated in a short period of time. Caffeine takes at least 20 minutes to get to the brain so there's NO WAY, NO HOW you'd feel it the second you swallow it. I get that there's a Placebo Effect but still, it's not tequila.

I don't deny that energy drinks can be hazardous for certain groups of people (people on certain medications, those who are pregnant, nursing or under the age of ~18...you know who you are). However, I think the biggest problem regarding energy drink safety is the lack of education toward how to drink the product. It doesn't seem like rocket-science but for some reason people are consuming energy drinks differently than they would a soda or a cup of coffee. WHY? 

NY Bans marketing of Red Bull but misses the bull's eye

Suffolk County in New York recently passed legislation that limits the marketing of energy drinks* to minors, and while this sounds like a brilliant demonstration of the movement to protect children from over-caffeinating themselves, I have several huge concerns.

First of all, notice I put an asterisk by the words "energy drink", above. The US Food and Drug Administration considers a product with the word "drink" to be a beverage, as opposed to a supplement. Beverages and supplements have different regulations regarding their label and how product safety is monitored. [For the full discussion, see my previous blog: Beverage Vs Supplement]

 Does this regulation apply only to energy drinks, meaning caffeinated products with a Nutrition Facts panel, or does it also apply to caffeinated products with a Supplement Facts panel? Monster energy drinks have a supplement facts panel (for now), but Red Bull has a Nutrition Facts panel. Rockstar products are split: some are supplements, some are beverages. Are we limiting marketing of ALL CAFFEINATED PRODUCTS and does this legislation include measures to prevent minors from ordering a Venti coffee with over 5 expresso shots?
 


And what about these caffeinated products, Starbucks Refreshers, will these be included in the legislation? They have caffeine, and if you consume more than 3 in one hour you're bound to get jitters.





 
Second of all, the bill's sponsor, Willam Spencer, highlighted THE WRONG PROBLEM in his letter to the media. According to an article in Food Product Design, "William Spencer said energy drinks consumed by kids may contain up to 800 milligrams of caffeine" (Food Product Design article).

In my life, I have examined over 100 caffeinated product labels--beverages, supplements, shots and coffees from several different states and from quite a few different countries. IN MY LIFE, I have never seen a product with 800 milligrams of caffeine. I am not denying that there is a product somewhere in the world with over 800 mg caffeine in one container, but the most popular energy products--Rockstar, RedBull, Amp, 5-Hour Energy, Monster, NOS, Full Throttle, RedLine--do not have 800 mg of caffeine in one container.  

Check it out for yourself on this brilliant site from Energyfiend.com: The 15 top energy drink brands (and their caffeine content - click on the brand name) 

Notice I said above, "...in one container."

Alas - the true problem: minors (and adults as well) are consuming too many caffeinated products in a 24-hour window. Where is this issue addressed in the legislation? According to the NBC New York report, "The law prohibits the marketing of energy drinks to minors, prohibits the sale of the drinks in county parks and sets up an extensive public education campaign on the side effects associated with the beverages." NBC New York report

I will be very interested in reading what this "extensive public education campaign" entails. Is it led by physicians? Does it include information on the maximum daily dosage of caffeine considered safe? (400mg - see previous blogs) Does it carry a strong message that the AMOUNT OF CAFFEINE ONE CONSUMES is dependent on the product as well as THE NUMBER OF SERVINGS ONE CHOOSES TO CONSUME IN ONE HOUR?

For the sake of everyone, I sincerely hope this public education campaign includes a lesson on reading labels, and on the importance of NOT mixing energy drinks with alcohol. If we don't address these issues, this bold piece of legislation will be ineffective at protecting people from the true hazards of caffeinated products.

 

Another Reason I'm Not a Vegan

There are several pros and cons to going Vegan. If you are Vegan, more power to you, but an article from Food Business News on Nutrition and Bone Health is why I’m glad I drink milk.

Two-and-a-half to three servings of dairy products such as low-fat milk and yogurt were associated with higher bone density, according to a study by the Institute for Aging Research (IFAR) involving over 3200 participants.

What about calcium supplements?

Well, that study doesn’t specify, but this one does:

A high intake of supplemental calcium (but NOT dietary calcium) was associated with higher risk of death by cardiovascular disease or heart disease in men. This association was determined by scientists at the National Cancer Institute, who reviewed data on 388,000 participants in the National Institues of Health-AARP Diet and Health Study. Supplemental calcium was not associated with cardiovascular death (CVD) or heart disease death in women, but dietary calcium was not associated to CVD death in men or women.

If I am now weary about calcium supplements and I still don’t want to drink milk, what can I do?

The alternative to calcium supplementation is, of course, low-fat dairy, and also beans and green leafy vegetables.  In fact, vegan or non-vegan, EVERYONE should try to consume as many dark green leafy vegetables as possible.

OK, why?

Vitamin K! Okay? Okay.  Oh, K…

Dark green leafy vegetables are the best source of Vitamin K, and vitamin K helps a protein called osteocalcin get in the proper form (its ‘carboxylated form’) for bone building. Osteocalcin plays a significant role in maintaining bone strength, but it has to be carboxylated to get absorbed into the bone. (Unless you’re a chemist, don’t worry about carboxylation – the point is this protein has to be a certain way to work, just like your umbrella when it’s raining). Getting sufficient Vitamin K from the diet is the best way to make sure this bone-building protein can do its thing.

So I still don’t need to drink milk, do I?

Well…

Osteocalcin is a protein, and amino acids (the building blocks of protein) are needed for protein synthesis in bone. Getting enough protein is therefore just as important as getting enough Vitamin K and calcium. Dark leafy greens help you get calcium and Vitamin K, but not so much with the protein. Furthermore, it’s not just the amount of protein, but the type. You need enough of all the right amino acids for your body to work properly, hence the term “complete protein”. Milk is a complete protein but plant foods have to be combined to provide all the right amino acids (for example, beans and rice provide all the right amino acids, so they’re called ‘complimentary proteins’).

So I STILL don’t need to drink milk, I just have to plan my proteins so I make sure they’re complimentary.

Correct! That works, as long as you’re good at planning. Personally, I’d rather just do one-stop-shopping with a glass of milk and then add green leafy veggies to lunch and dinner. Vitamin K, check. Calcium, check. Protein, check.

The caveat here is that bone health depends on getting enough of all three: calcium, vitamin K and protein.  

Consuming three servings of milk or yogurt (ice cream doesn’t count) is great for providing the protein and calcium, but you really can’t afford to skimp on the green leafy vegetables. Not only do the leafy greens provide calcium and vitamin K, but they also help your body stay neutral. When you get too much protein and not enough veggies, your body gets a little acidic (think lemon juice). Oxidizing/metabolizing certain proteins results in excess acids that have to be excreted. Your body can only lower the acidity level in your urine so much (or it’ll REALLY damage your insides!). Using a buffer, something slightly basic (think baking soda or toothpaste) will make the urine as neutral (think water) as possible. Vegetables provide buffers, but without enough veggies your body will borrow the buffers from the bone.

Science hasn’t caught up to the boom in alternative milks (almond milk, rice milk etc) so no one can say for sure whether drinking these products will give your body the same benefits as low-fat milk. Since women reach peak bone mass before their thirties, I’m going to continue drinking plenty of milk and double-up on the leafy greens.

Guest blog on Shakeology.com

As a food technologist on the product development team for Shakeology, I know these shakes and their ingredients inside and out. Here is an article I recently submitted for the Shakeology blog site:

 How can Shakeology help give you energy?
 

 

My Dream Date with 3 Very Different Men

Given the opportunity to have dinner with anyone of my choosing, I would invite Klaus Badelt, John McClane and Sam Seaborn.

Klaus Badelt composed the score to the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie, and though it eludes me why Hans Zimmer took over for Pirates 2, 3 and 4 it is no mystery why the score of the first movie moves me so. I'm a sucker for a lot of things--biceps, blue eyes, sharp wit, dimples...and strings, especially the cello. Just as I feel some biceps look better than others (if it looks like a balloon about to pop, it's too big), some string arrangements sound better than others (Yellowcard-okay; Mumford-less okay). When it comes to the score of Pirates, Mr. Badelt has created the perfect balance between fluid movement and dynamic power. Though the strings and drums are prominent throughout the entire soundtrack, there's enough music from the other instruments to keep the music from becoming predictable or repetitive.
Honestly, when I listen to the soundtrack, it's like I can see it. As the music grows and fades I can almost feel the notes rising and falling like the chest of a living breathing body or like the rolling waves of the sea. Unlike other movie scores, there are enough different themes throughout the soundtrack to keep it interesting. I've listened to this soundtrack since the movie came out and it still grabs my attention and holds my interest. To this day, I am incapable of listening to "To the Pirates' Cave" without imagining a gymnastics floor routine, dynamic and dramatic.
There are times when you listen to a song and you can just feel the beat. Your foot or finger may start tapping without you realizing it because the beat has become a part of you, as much a part of you as the beat of your own heart. I want to have dinner with Klaus Badelt because this music is his creation. His ideas, his thoughts brought to life can affect me so, and thus I'd love the opportunity to tell him how much his music means to me.

John McClane is the coolest guy I know, much to the disappointment of the guys I know in real life. John McClane is a smart mouth, an alcoholic, a hero and a badass. He is not a good husband and not the best father (well,... he loses points for not being around but wins major points for the length he goes to save his kids). He is at times a bit of a jerk, but what I admire about this guy is his sense of humor and his perseverance.
 Those who know me are familiar with my sense of humor - it's difficult for me to NOT make a cheesy joke when the opportunity is presented. Case in point: my boss and I were discussing problems with protein powders and he said, "There's no way..." at which point I interrupted and said, "No 'whey', get it, hahaha..." (True story).
Suffice to say, I admire John McClane's sense of humor, especially because it comes through even during times of high stress. Like a lot of people, I tend to hunker down and solemn up when faced with extreme stress. Let's be honest, the 'stress' I'm referring to is nothing like being held in a hostage or life-or-death situation with a terrorist, but that's because A) I'm both cautious and lucky and B) I'm not in any action movies. Regardless, I'd like to be able to maintain a sense of humor and clear focus during high stress situations, and that's why I'd like to have dinner with this man--so he can teach me. If nothing else, we could swap cheesy jokes and one-liners all night, and maybe I could convince him to teach me to drive defensively on the 405.

Sam Seaborn is a bit of a nerd but he writes like no one else I know (with the possible exception of Justin Prochnow). For the moment, I'm going to ignore the puppet-master, Aaron Sorkin, who is undeniably the genius behind Sam's writing skills. If you don't know what I mean, watch Episode 1 of the show Studio 60, watch any episode of The West Wing, seasons 1-4, and watch the movie The American President (especially the scene in which Michael J. Fox yells at Michael Douglas).
Aaron Sorkin is a genius but for the moment, Sam Seaborn best personifies a great writer in my mind. Sam Seaborn once said, "Oratory should raise your heart rate. Oratory should blow the doors off the place." And it's true. A great passage in a book, a moving speech, a dramatic monologue--their greatness is measured by how strongly they captivate your attention and stir your imagination. Great writing should be clear and concise, but not formulaic or predicable. Great writing should pull you forward without losing you. Great, powerful writing moves you. Sam knows this. Sam believes this. Sam is a nerd and a bit of a do-gooder, but he is a great writer. I wish I could write like him (because wanting to write like Aaron Sorkin is simply out of the question). Maybe one of them or both of them could share some advice over dinner.

So there you have it: Klaus Badelt for his creativity, John McClane for his stress-management and sense of humor, and Sam Seaborn for his writing.  Maybe one day I'll be able to find a guy who embodies the qualities of these three, and the look in his eyes or the warmth of his hug will be able to move me like Klaus' strings, McClane's sense of humor and Sam's speeches. In the meantime, what moves you?

Is it a drug or a supplement or a beverage?

The FDA has increased its attention and output of warning letters regarding products that claim to belong in one category but truly belong in another. In the press, however, the distinction between these categories constantly gets blurred. Here is a perfect example of the press blurring this distinction, further confusing consumers.

This news story was just released through Nutritional Outlook's weekly newsletter:

First Functional Drink for Eye Health:

A New York ophthalmologist has created OJO, touted as the first beverage for eye health. The drink features the vitamins and minerals studied in the national Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS) for macular degeneration: vitamins C, E, and beta-carotene, and zinc. The beverage features other eye-health ingredients as well, including lutein, omega-3s, B vitamins, and superfruits."

Nutritional Outlook article 


Here's the problem:

1. Beverages aren't supposed to treat or cure diseases; neither are supplements. The only products that can legally claim to treat and cure disease are drugs. HOWEVER, it's fine for foods to be associated with reducing the risk  of certain aliments, examples:

Adequate calcium as part of a healthful diet, along with physical activity, may reduce the risk of osteoporosis in later life. 

 - This claim is from Food Labeling 101 
(No, REALLY, it's Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 101: Food Labeling 
Food Labeling Claims that are allowed, per the Code of Federal Regulations 

There are several different claims permitted for particular nutrients, but there is currently no claim permitted for associating the vitamins and superfruits in this drink with a reduced risk of macular degeneration.


2. This product is based on the findings of the Age-Related Eye Disease Study (AREDS), in which 4,757 participants, ages 55-80 years, with varying levels of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) were given one of four daily oral tablets.

(Well gee, doesn't that sound like a supplement or a drug?)

The tablets contained either 1) zinc alone; 2) antioxidants alone; 3) a combination of antioxidants and zinc; or 4) a placebo. The good news is that the people who got tablet #3 (antioxidants plus zinc) had a lower risk of developing AMD.
AREDS Study Details 

So instead of taking these oral tablets, you can get the same benefits by drinking this new product, right?   

 The fact that this beverage is supposed to provide the same benefits to eye health as the tablets implies the product is working as a drug; the fact that the beverage is supposed to increase (ahem, supplement) the levels of vitamins and antioxidants that reduce the risk of eye diseases implies the product is a supplement.


3. The product being advertised in this Nutritional Outlook article is advertised as "The Visionary Drink". The word "drink" and "beverage" both imply this product is a food, and yet a trip to the website features a promising claim with the same fine print as your typical supplement: 

Designed for anyone who wants to help protect and preserve healthy vision.*

*These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.

  main site for Ojo Nectar 

Did you notice the way they use the word "protect"? They could get in big trouble for saying the product protects healthy vision, but it's okay to say the protect is for people who want to protect their vision. Details, details....

The FDA has sent warning letters like this one to companies that sell supplements that look too much like beverages (FDA: "Hey, if you talk about it like it's a beverage, we're going to regulate it using beverage rules, even if you call it a supplement."). Though this drink is posing as a beverage, it's claims indicate the manufacturers view it as a supplement. These categories are distinct and mutually exclusive.


BOTTOM LINE: The lines between food, drugs and supplements gets fuzzier and fuzzier but becoming more aware of these little tricks and word-plays will help you get a firmer grasp of what you're putting in your body and why. A product like this one may in fact reduce your risk of age-related eye diseases, but only drugs have to be proven safe and effective before they can be sold to treat disease. Only certain nutrients have enough evidence to support health claims, so knowing what those nutrients and claims are increases your odds of actually improving your health. 

Beverage vs Supplement: What Monster Energy’s switch from supplement to beverage means to the consumer

Next time you pick up an energy drink, take a peek at the label – does it say “Nutrition Facts” or “Supplement Facts”? What difference does one word make? Well, in this case, it’s kind of a big deal.

Monster Energy announces plans to move many of its products from the supplement category to the beverage category. While this may seem like changing one word, this move involves significant changes to how Monster energy drinks are labeled, regulated and monitored for safety.

One of the most common mistakes regarding energy drinks in the news is the claim “the FDA does not regulate energy drinks”. Even the reputable Journal of the American Medical Association made this mistake!

First of all, “energy drink” is a term used to refer to both beverages and supplements, but these are two different categories of products, each with their own set of regulations. Second of all, both beverages and supplements are indeed regulated by the FDA. 

[Henceforth, the term "energy drink" will be used to specifically refer to products in the supplement category, whereas "energy beverage" will be used to refer to products in the food and beverage category]

1) Food/Bev vs Supplement Regulations:

·      Beverages are considered conventional foods; supplements are not food or beverages…or drugs (hence the supplement disclaimers “not intended to treat or cure disease”)

·      Ingredients added to FOOD must be approved food additives OR be classified as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS)

o   Example: Ginko biloba is acceptable in supplements, but not permitted in food because it’s not GRAS or covered by any food additive regulation

·      Ingredients added to SUPPLEMENTS must meet these two requirements:

1)   The ingredient must be a dietary ingredient* and

2)   If the ingredient was not sold in the US as a dietary supplement before October 15, 1994 (I’ll explain this date in a second), the manufacturer must file a special report that notifies the FDA of the intention to use this ingredient and must provide scientific evidence of its safety

*A “dietary ingredient” is defined by the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) as a vitamin, mineral, herb/botanical, amino acid, metabolite/extract or some other substance intended to boost (or supplement) the level man already consumes.

A blueberry would be a food ingredient

Blueberry extracts would be a dietary ingredient

Why October 15, 1994?

Because that’s when DSHEA was signed into law. Before this time, dietary supplements were subject to the same regulatory requirements as food products. Now, dietary supplements are just “under the umbrella” of food, which is why their safety is monitored by the FDA’s Center for FOOD Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN).

 

2) Food Labels vs Supplement Labels

Food products and supplements are BOTH required to list all the components added to make the final formula

·      Food labels are required to list the ingredients by descending order, meaning the ingredient used the most comes first in the list while the ingredients that make up less than 2% of the total formula go last

o   NOTE: only certain ingredients (Calories, Total Fat, vitamins A and C to name a few) are required to be itemized with the amounts, other ingredients are only required to be mentioned in the list of ingredients

·      Supplements are required to list every ingredient in the formula, either in the “Supplement Facts” panel or in the “Other Ingredients” section

o   NOTE: the supplement label may group “proprietary blends” and list only the total amount of the blend, as long as there are no ingredients added to the supplement that are omitted entirely from the label

Special Circumstances with Caffeine:  caffeine is only required on the food label when it is added, not inherent—this is why dark chocolate does not mention caffeine in the ingredients list, but it is included within the product. When it is added, the word "caffeine" must appear in the ingredients list, but the amount of caffeine is not required to be listed.

If you don't believe me, here is the official FDA statement.

3) Food Safety vs Supplement Safety

·      The FDA limited the amount of caffeine in cola-type drinks to 0.02% (71 mg per 12 oz serving)

·       Neither coffee nor energy drinks are held to this limit (and BOTH have been found to exceed this limit)

·      SUPPLEMENT manufacturers, packers, and distributors are required by the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FFDCA) to report any serious adverse events to the FDA

·      FOOD manufacturers, packers, or distributors are NOT required by the FFDCA to report serious adverse events to FDA

By definition, a serious adverse event is a health-related incident that results in death, a life-threatening experience, inpatient hospitalization, a persistent or significant disability or incapacity, a congenital anomaly or birth defect, or medical or surgical intervention to prevent any of the preceding outcomes.  

Want to know more about AERs? See Question #5.

BOTTOM LINE:  
Marketing energy drinks as beverages instead of supplements will theoretically prevent a manufacturer from using questionable ingredients in the product (no unpronounceable plant extracts from different planets allowed). But will this change make the product safer? That remains to be seen. True, the levels of caffeine in the drink may be cut, but only the word caffeine, not the level, is required to be listed on the label. With any supplement, such as a vitamin, reading the directions for how much to consume at once is crucial. However, energy drinks usually look like beverages, and the reports of people experiencing symptoms of caffeine overdose is a clear indication that the directions on the energy drink label are not being followed. With the move to the beverage category, it's still possible for people to consume more servings than they should, just as some people enjoy more than 3 sodas per day.

Remember to read the labels - with caffeinated beverages of any kind, personal responsibility is a key ingredient.

-Green-Eyed Guide

Extra Reading: Beverage Daily Article: Monster Energy switches to beverage