Very astute.
Except that’s not what happened. It has roughly the same caffeine per ounce as regular coffee and was labeled as a caffeinated drink. Have you ever seen someone drink three cups of coffee in a day?
I have never seen anyone drink 36 ounces of coffee at once, no. Nobody goes out for a big gulp of coffee. Even Mountain Dew, which is notoriously high in caffeine for a “drink” has far less than this lemonade - which is a drink one usually thinks of as uncaffeinated.
There is a big difference between saying “There is some” and saying “There is more than any other drink this size.”
Not quite 36 ounces of coffee but…
A quart is my usual serving size.
Yet out of the millions of them that have been served, only one person allegedly had a problem. This was not a dangerous drink because it’s not anywhere close to a lethal dose. There are plenty of energy drinks with 300+ mg of caffeine available at super markets and convenience stores. The corporation is not liable here.
They’re 31 ounces.
I’ve seen someone down a “trenta” iced coffee from Starbucks. They’re 31 ounces., so apparently there are people who go for a Big Gulp of coffee.
I used to volunteer in a highschool football/basketball concession stand. It was a band parents club money making concern.
We had a young lady of 16 order a snickers candy bar. She knew full well she shouldn’t have peanuts. Of course she had a reaction and her parents went sue crazy. They sued the candy company, who covers all their bases. All their chocolate is marked “may contain peanuts, or has been manufactured where peanuts have been” They got nowhere with that.
They brought suit on the School district. Lost that one.
They tried to bring suit on the Band Parents group. Their lawyer found out we had very little money and dropped it.
The girl knew and wore a bracelet saying she had a peanut allergy. I’m sure she was aware Snickers has peanuts. It’s well known fact.
She got through the anaphylaxis and went on to graduate highschool with seemingly no ill effects.
The school district had us cut out chocolate candy after that. No peanut M&Ms, or anything was allowed. No Hershey’s. No Milkyway, no chocolate bars of any kind. Big No No.
No one told us we had to quit using the peanut oil we fried the French fries and Chicken strips in.
No one ever checked the popcorn oil that had a large warning printed right on the jug “may contain up to half peanut oil”
We were never questioned about the chocolate chip cookies. Manufactured in a plant where nuts were present because of their Peanut butter cookies.
The chips all have peanut warnings on the bags. Never heard foul, on that.
And what about the 6 yo. who spent his Moms whole $20 on gum, juicy fruit, double mint, big red? And gave it away in the courtyard as we watched. What about those kids teeth? ( Mom was enjoying the game, I guess) No one ever said a thing.
And all those cokes, sprites, Dr pepper, Fanta of every flavor? No kid ever bought water on purpose. If they were athletes or in the band they bought Powerade or Gatorades. Still chock full of sugar. Probably a bunch of caffeine too.
No parent or anyone took notice of the kids buying NOS energy drinks. Has a big caffeine jolt. They’d buy em 2 at a time. Lines could be long. And the cookie line was a separate line to go in.
Sometimes I wonder how any kid gets grown up and not just sick as hell.
And, now it’s Halloween. I’ll be the old Witch and say, go home kid and eat an apple. Without caramel and nuts.
And for God’s sake brush your teeth.
Rant over.
The reason we know the caffeine content of those energy drinks is that they are labeled. That’s the whole issue here: whether or not the drinks were properly labeled.
If they didn’t have any label but the word “charged,” then I’d say definitely not. And if they said they have the same amount of caffeine as coffee, then I’d call that misleading. Most people would assume that means that a standard serving size of the drink contained the same amount of caffeine as a cup of coffee.
I do think it seems bizarre that someone who has a likely lethal intolerance to caffeine would intentionally drink such a highly caffeinated beverage. That alone makes me suspicious that the drink was not properly labeled.
And it sure seems Panera thinks the same way, as they are going out of their way now to label their drinks more clearly. That does not sound like an organization who thinks that they were already sufficiently clear in their labeling.
I think that it’s way more likely that that young person screwed up. I’m not even positive that the drink even caused her death. This is not a case where there have been lots of deaths or even other illnesses linked to the drinks. It’s one person out of millions. At worst a freak accident.
Out here in the real world they are doing that so that they don’t even have a one in a milllon chance of some other crack pot family frivolously going after them. It was blindingly obvious it was a caffeinated drink, it was within normal parameters of other caffeinated drinks per ounce and it’s incumbent on a person with her health issue to be more cautious.
Of course they are, to hear some tell it. They’re an EEEEEVIL corporation with nice deep pockets. We certainly cannot expect a legal adult with no known cognitive issues to actually take personal responsibility for her own health and safety.
Stories like the Jeffrey Wigand/Big Tobacco, Purdue Pharma, and “Big Sugar”.
‘Buyer beware’ should be viewed in the same light as “We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone” (ie, the latter is not license to discriminate, despite what so many think).
I like “am I my brother’s keeper?” more than caveat emptor.
[aside: I have long thought that the concept of ‘caveat emptor’ might make for an interesting thread]
They were labeled clearly right on the dispensers as shown in the picture shared above:
That picture is typical of what I saw at all the locations I have visited. It does not in large letters say “as much caffeine as…” which I did not really pay attention to but the amount of mg of caffeine was there in bold letters, and that I noticed it right away when they first added these drinks to the stores.
The only change that I saw since this incident was the additional notes saying that caffeine can be dangerous and should not be consumed by children. I do not know how this shows that Panera thought they labelled their drink incorrectly but more, that people don’t know the dangers of consuming too much Caffeine.
//i\\
Three cups of coffee does not seem a lot. Though I couldn’t personally drink this much, diner waitresses are generally eager to refill cups. Starbucks and many other places don’t charge for refills of brewed coffee.
For me the question is what level of care is to be expected of an adult who knows they have a potentially lethal sensitivity. Sure, Panera coulda done more. But how much is enough? Meanwhile, the dead idiot coulda asked, “Does this contain caffeine?” And chosen a glass of water.
And the dumb kid w/ peanut allergies who ate a Snickers? Words fail me.
Even sadder, it’s typically some insurance company that pays the claim, not the company at fault.
How do we enforce responsible behavior on individuals?
“Hey this drink has a ton of caffeine and that may kill me.” Pours a large cup.
Leave the young woman out of it. She took a risk and accepted the consequences. There’s no reason to think she would have sued Panera or blamed someone else.
I’m annoyed by the comments about what she should have done. She was an adult, she should have done whatever she wanted. We’ve all ingested dangerous things and engaged in risky behavior, particularly at 21.
The question of whether the company met their obligation and provided enough information for her to make an informed decision is reasonable to ask. As someone (maybe @Johnny_Bravo ) said up-thead – what other mechanism do we have to resolve this question?
Fair enough. “The idiot parents could accept that their dead adult child…”
But, is it somehow inappropriate to comment on the dead person’s actions? Drinking something that could be lethal to you seems - uh - careless?
It’s not inappropriate to comment on the dead person’s actions - but she’s not the one suing and there’s no reason to think she was careless rather than that she knew how much caffeine was in the drink, knew the risks and decided to drink it anyway. People do risky things all the time with full knowledge of the risks.
If I were suing in this sort of circumstance, it would be for the PR. This sort of “they shouldn’t be suing” action will get information on the risks of caffeine both to corporations and to consumers, some of whom may also be at medical risk from too large a dose.