Energy drink industry can give itself a jolt
News
Updated 1 month ago
The level of added regulation that a respected Canadian medical journal wants applied to the sale and marketing of energy drinks should be adopted.
Even the association that represents energy drink companies appears to be in agreement - or almost so -with the first-tier recommendations included in an editorial in the current Canadian Medical Association Journal.
"At a minimum," the editorial states in its closing argument, all energy drinks that contain more than 100 milligrams of caffeine should be clearly labelled as "not for children" and carry warnings about the effects of caffeine; advertising campaigns should not be directed at children; and public health agencies should be given more money for public education on the dangers of caffeine for children.
Compare that with the response to the CMAJ editorial from Refreshment Canada, a national trade association representing drink manufacturers. The association says "energy boost" drinks already contain warnings that they are not for children and list the amount of caffeine in each can. It also "strongly" agrees that "energy drinks should be marketed responsibly."
The important difference in their positions relates to degree of regulation.
The major producers do put warnings on their cans that the drinks are not for children. However, the CMAJ says not all of the 18 licenced energy drinks sold in Canada carry a warning. And the warnings that do exist are not prominent. They should be easier to see and more specific.
In terms of listing ingredients, the big producers again appear to be doing a responsible job. A check of four different drinks sold in a local convenience store found all listed the total caffeine content, including amounts found in "natural" additives like guarana. However, the CMAJ says not all drinks are that well labelled. The editorial calls for "government mandated restrictions on labelling, sales and marketing, or self-imposed industry-wide standards with clear labelling accompanied by public education."
We would endorse self-regulation by the industry. If manufacturers don't adopt clear enough standard warning labels and content listings the government could ask for changes. Federal regulation should be a last resort.
Advertising should be easy. The companies say their ads don't target children. Should that ever happen, bans and/or fines would be appropriate.
Marketing is not so easy. The CMAJ editorial mentions sponsorship of snowboarding and skateboarding competitions as an example of how youths are lured into the energy drink market. Should those sponsorship links be banned? The CMAJ hasn't asked for a ban and we would not like to see one.
Energy drinks are becoming more popular and they contain more caffeine than is safe for children. The CMAJ's recommendations and co-operation from manufacturers would help curb a potential health issue.
Topic guidelines: We welcome your thoughts, stories and information related to this article.
Please stay on topic and be respectful of others. Keep the conversation appropriate for interested readers.
