Family files lawsuit against Panera Bread after college student who drank ‘charged lemonade’ dies
nbcnews.com
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
IIRC their explanation was for take away, keeping the coffee hotter so it would last until you got home.
I thought the specific wording in their documentation was because they wanted the smell of the coffee to fill the restaurant. Did McDonald's give refills of coffee?
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.
There were several factors at once. Serving to a customer at 180+ is a bit high. And that particular machine was slightly overcalibrated. It was 193 degrees if I recall, not 180-190. And then, yeah, the cups are crap.
Funny you should mention that. I use to work for the franchise owner who's brother-in-law (who also worked for the franchise) gave that woman the cup of coffee (or so he would say) when they were franchising with McDonalds. And guess where I was working at the time? Panera
Where are you working now I’m sure this streak isn’t over.
If I had to guess based on external evidence, maybe Congress?
Okay that’s fucking funny.
It also explains why the coffee is so bad. Heating coffee above a certain temp is just burning it.
It should be brewed at 195-205 F, just a bit higher than McDonalds served it.
But normally it would quickly cool down after it’s brewed. Any burning from reaching that temp is from a hot plate exceeding the temp and burning the bits of oil and soot that are in contact with the plate. Water, and I assume coffee, can’t be heated above boiling at 212 F anyway, but the hot plate and carafe or urn parts can, and steam can, and oil can.
Anyway I’m just saying it would be reasonable for fresh and good-tasting coffee to be in that temperature range. But it’s only going to stay there for any length of time if it’s burned on a hot plate or, more ideally, dripped directly into an insulated container.
It’s more likely their coffee tastes like shit because it was badly roasted, ground months ago, has since gone stale and bitter, and is full of unnecessary added chemicals and preservatives, just like the rest of their shit food.
If I remember correctly, her labia got fused together... Super fucked up burns.
Do a bit of research into the marketing actually used for this drink. Assuming the store uses the standard Panera marketing, there's a big sign on the dispenser saying how much caffeine is in it. It's a tragic mistake, but unless that location uniquely screwed up, that's all it is.
Another commentor said their husband ordered it thinking it was a regular lemonade. The issue could be more wide spread than a single store.
I noted that. Yet another commentor linked to a vlog where the signs weren't present because the dispensers were behind the counter and had to be ordered. I think there are absolutely locations NOT showing the marketing.
But please check out the other comments here and see the one showing what the dispensers with signs look like. Those are BIG signs with BIG mention of caffeine.
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.
More caffeine than two energy drinks combined seems very excessive to me.
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?
Why didn't you read the very clear, explicit label?
What very clear, explicit label?
"Plant based and clean with as much caffeine as our dark roast coffee." is the full quote. Then, it lists the specific amount of caffeine for the two sizes.
You can argue it should have a more eye-catching and cautionary presentation, but it's disingenuous to say it wasn't clear and explicit.
Forget the article; go to an actual Panera. The amount of caffeine is clearly labeled right under the name of the drink. To be fair, their drinks contain way too much, but you can't say that they don't already make the label clear and easy to interpret. People are idiots who don't read the label beyond the "lemonade" part.
I don't think it's "way too much". A large of those every morning is still under the "healthy" FDA recommendations, wherein there are zero known negative side-effects for most people.
That part. Though I don't think people realize how much caffeine is in their dark roast coffee. Because it is more caffeine than multiple energy drinks for the same volume. There's a reason a standard cup of coffee is like 6 oz instead of 20 oz.
It also includes the caffeine "dosage" in grams for those who want/need to know. That inclusion is more prominent than the description he's quoting.
Flip-side, you can't get a 6oz coffee in most of the US. The most popular coffee around me is generally sold between 20oz and 30oz sizes.
Who's serving up coffee in 6oz cups? Starbucks and most other coffee places have standard sizes of 12, 16, and 20oz.
Standard isn't what people drink. It's what the nutrition label on the package and medical guidelines are generally talking about, though. When the FDA says 4-5 cups of coffee is safe for most adults, they don't mean 48-100oz of coffee.
But as to who makes 6 oz cups? When you make coffee yourself, the cups on the coffee maker are 6 oz.
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
Why is quadruple Monster even on the menu of a restaurant that is mostly famous for soup?
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.
Agreed, I stopped eating there 5-6 years ago after another shrinkflation update to their menu ruined my favorite sandwich. Haven't missed the place.
There was one on campus at my university. I almost never ate there, but it was always pretty popular. This drink seems like it's designed for that. Get a cup of this stuff and drink it over the course of a long day/night and it'd be fine. Mistaking it for just lemonade, or even a regular caffienated drink, is a huge mistake that should never have been able to happen. There should be clear warnings and labels.
They did have quality in the early 2000s, remember my grandma taking us their for their awesome bread. Sad to see it enshittify
It was probably invented by and for BOH staff
It's effectively the largest size of a coffee, which is comparable to what coffee shops sell.
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
Also it's mixed on-site by employees, so consistency of caffeine between batches occasions is at risk.
Considering that a fatal dose of caffeine is between 10,000-15,000 mg, I don't think some variance in the mix is really a problem.
No? Not even with the free refills the girl who died from this was getting?
So are you saying "f u" to all coffee shops? Because I can (and often do) get a standard on-menu beverage with more caffeine than these larges without a single warning on it at Dunkin Donuts.
These lemonades are at least covered in "this has THIS much caffeine in it" advertising.
I don't understand how it's reckless to serve something that 99.99% of the population will never have any significant health problem with, even if they drank double or triple the amount this girl did.
All caffinated beverages should be required to disclose their caffeine content on the packaging.
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
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.
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.
If you have a heart condition that limits your caffeine intake, you had better know how much you can consume.
I’m pretty familiar with the mg amounts based on reading soda labels. That would be 11 glasses of Diet Pepsi, which does sound like a lot.
A lot of pepsi. Not a lot of coffee.
But it says right there 'as much caffeine as our coffee'.
100mg of caffeine for an 8oz cup of coffee is pretty widely known. I would argue it's up to the individual with the medical conditions to know exactly how much caffeine they are consuming vs how much is safe for them to consume.
After reading the article it makes it seem like she went to a physical location to get the drink, which has a placard on the dispenser stating exactly how much caffeine is in the drink. Shit, it even states she also got the drink a few days before she died so she had to have known it had a lot of caffeine in it. The only thing that makes sense here is I'm wondering if she ordered it for pickup and the online menu doesn't have all of this written out clearly. If that's the case then Panera needs to update that ASAP.
I wouldn't count on it
I did not know this, and have never met anyone who does
I’m kind of confused by the “it should be labeled!” comments as to me, that is decently labeled. The descriptions say “coffee” and “guarana” for each one, and listing the amounts of caffeine is more information than you get for other drinks. It’s not too much to think that the customer (especially someone with a life threatening condition) would read the descriptions.
I have never been to a Panera, are drinks self serve?
Last time I got this drink it was self-serve, yeah. The drinks are in large labelled containers, not like a soda fountain with just a small logo.
Agreed. Some of us are careful about how much caffeine we ingest because we want it to work when we use it, and/or because we get real twitchy when overcaffeinated.
In this case, there is a large sign on the dispenser that includes caffeine content in mg, as well as comparing it to their dark-roast coffee.
Welp, this post might have just saved my life. I had no idea, and a heart condition.
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.
We don't know if it's a completely reasonable case, yet. A few statements in the article would clearly cross the line of honest journalism if they weren't quotations (IMO they still do). Specifically, I think quoting 3 words of their "has lots of caffeine" descriptive sign out-of-context was incredibly dishonest. Might as well comment that a "Do Not Enter" sign reads "Enter". I mean it TECHNICALLY does, but let's give the reader the full story and let us decide, and the "Do not" is important. Just like the second half of "Plant-based and Clean with as much caffeine as our Dark Roast coffee" is more contextually important than merely "Plant-based and clean".
Is it possible the signs were smudged, missing, facing the wrong direction, or too small? Yeah, sure. But that's not what the article is representing as the truth. Some of the quotes comparing the lemonade with the lower-caffeine "dark coffee" even seem nonsensical because the article is hiding the full context of the above quote, that the lemonade is advertised as "as much caffeine as our dark coffee".
Just want to pop in and remind people that the supposed scourge of "frivolous lawsuits" was just a horribly effective PR stunt to drive down corporate accountability. If you feel wronged, sue if you can. Let a judge or jury decide.
However, it's about preponderance of evidence, not "your favorite team". Even if we have valid reasons not to like Panera, whether THIS lawsuit has merit should only have to do with the facts of the situation.
And the article was a lying sack of turd in response to that question. The article being sleazy doesn't mean Panera is innocent, but it doesn't mean they ain't.
Also the part where she had the same thing to drink before.
I missed that line, and it blows the thing wide open. There's no way someone with a heart condition who is avoiding caffeine couldn't tell a LARGE Charged Lemonade was caffeinated after buying it on multiple occasions. Even if you're "resistant" to caffeine, you'd feel something.
That's insane.
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.
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.
You can't believe that people would want heroic doses of sugar and caffeine, two of the most available addictive substances on the market?
Also a lot of people don't like the taste of coffee or tea
I'm basically the target audience for this and I'd never heard of it
Agreed that it is a very weird product to just kinda... have
There’s still a large number of us wondering wtf the market for Red Bull is. I want a drink with the flavor and consistency of watered down Stretch Armstrong guts with more caffeine than anything that has ever existed. It seems like such a weird product in general.
I'm apparently one of the few people that actually like the taste of redbull, but talking about market, redbull is all about giving people energy, be it real or not is another thing, people buy it when they want to party all night long, when they need to study for a test and don't want to fall asleep or whatever else related to energy (or just because they like the taste like me lol) so the market does exist.
And since taste was talked about, I absolutely hate the taste of beer and especially those high hop content ones, but they're incredibly popular, what's up with that?
IDK about others but beer tasted horrible to me for years. After a while it just grew on me. Apparently your taste buds change and get weaker as you grow older so strong tastes start tasting better.
Red Bull tastes so fucking bad. It's like cough medicine
It doesn't have more caffeine than a red bull per unit volume. But yes, if you compare the largest size to one can of red bull it will win out. So will drinking a similar volume of coffee.
And I'd guess the market for it is people who want coffee levels of caffeine but don't like the taste of coffee or the citrus battery acid taste of energy drinks.
The 30oz size has 390mg caffeine. The FDA says 400mg a day is not generally associated with harmful effects for adults without heart conditions etc. If the FDA says up to 400mg is fine, I don't think it's fair to call that the "danger threshold." That's like calling the speed limit the "danger threshold." It's set there for a reason, but you don't go from "no adverse effects" to "danger" as soon as you cross the line.
It's advertised as having the same amount of caffeine as their coffee. 30oz of coffee is a pretty significant amount. Not typically dangerous, but hardly something you can drink by accident.
390 in a serving versus 400 per day.
That's an entire days worth in one blast.
Most people normally don't drink their caffeine over a 24 hour period. Maybe a couple hours. The half-life of caffeine in the body being about 5 hours, the peak concentration of caffeine won't be that much higher. Note the FDA doesn't say "400mg is safe but only if you don't drink it all at once."
It's sad that someone loss their life to - of all things - lemonade.
If you sell a 30oz container, you should have to label the amount of shit that is in that container instead of making up your own, cockamamie "serving size" that does not relate to real-world situations whatsoever.
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.
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.
The trouble is quite a lot of people have the pre-existing condition of being brainless. So they mainline 5 cans in a row, if you do that with Coke nothing happens, if you do that with Monster even a healthy person is going to have heart problems.
Also some prat had a great idea of mixing it with Yeager. Thus mixing two of the most disgusting liquids in the world together. But more importantly mixing a stimulant and a suppressant, which again can have serious health risks even for otherwise healthy individuals.
We don't sell glue to children even though most of them probably won't sniff it. So why do we tolerate energy drinks for them? The lasting kids need is to be even more hyper.
Mine is cannabis and booze. Never mix something that makes me want to throw up with something that settles the stomach. If I drink too much I want it out of my body ASAP.
"They are not incredibly dangerous, except for when they are incredibly dangerous"
By that logic, peanuts are also "incredibly dangerous".
Note: I'm not promoting or condoning the consumption of energy drinks, they are generally unhealthy. But calling them "incredibly dangerous" because they can evoke such a reaction in a small subset of the population is bullshit.
Is it not credible that a small slice of people might be extra sensitive to something that the rest of the population can handle without issue?
You dont read so good
There often more caffeine in a standard coffee than half a litre of monster energy drink.
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.
Yeah, it seems for every person like the above with, I assume, a sensitivity to caffeine, there's my friend from high school that pounded 3 BFC Monsters (32 oz each) and went to the next class like nothing happened.
It’s not really the caffeine that’s the problem in most energy drinks. It actually has less caffeine than a typical cup of coffee. It’s the addition of things like guarana, taurine, niacin, and ginseng that make them problematic for many. The high amounts of sugar in most can have pretty negative effects too.
Fair enough, caffeine aside, my point is the same. Some people look at an energy drink and begin vibrating and other need to drink it like water to feel an effect at all.
Shit its got niacin in? That sounds scary! I'm going to cut anything that contains niacin out of my diet!
Hah!
250ml: caffeine
Energy drinks: 80mg
Coffee: 100mg (80-120)
Cola: 25mg
Black tea: 12-20mg
Wait coffee has more caffeine then energy drinks?
Depends on the energy drink. The little V8 energy drinks have 80mg, and the green dragon extreme has 180mg in the same 8oz can. But yeah coffee has more than people think.
Energy drinks have more in them than caffeine
Yep. For proper brewed coffee, anyway.
Those numbers are off.
Energy drink: 80-300mg
Coffee: 80-120mg this was accurate
Cola/other soda: 25-55mg
Black tea: 40-60mg
What energy drink has 300mg caffeine in 250ml?
Highest I can think of is Viso at ~160mg per 250ml
Rockstart Xdurance has 300mg in a 20oz can
I don't drink energy drinks anymore but to answer your question you build up tolerance.
Half a monster is 43mg caffeine. About as much as a Pepsi, or less than 3oz of Dunkin Donuts coffee (a small is 180mg at 10oz). I'm not at all saying you're lying about your experience, but what you are describing is an extreme caffeine sensitivity (or a reaction to something else).
I used to chug multiple of those on the way home from school and didn't feel a thing. I think we lose much resilience with age.
I am not, and was not, sensitive to caffeine in any way.
Hell, that can be proven just by the embarrassingly large amount of Mountain Dew I drank a day during that era of my life, which had absolutely zero effect on me.
My boss drinks like 8 energy drinks a day. Idk how he isn't dead.
Maybe he is, but he just hasn't come down from the high yet.
Same, caffeine content aside it's like 100 grams in sugar every day from energy drinks. Gross
A few years ago my doctor put me on beta blockers to try and manage my migraines. My blood pressure was always within healthy limits, usually around 110/70, on the beta blockers it dropped a little bit, but nothing drastic. My heart rate on the other hand?
Resting, it was 41-45 bmp, sitting and fidgeting it was 54-58bpm, and walking around it was 65-73. I'd have to really push hard at the gym to get it to 100 and it would drop back down so suddenly when I stopped I'd often get blue lips when doing cool down stretches.
My fingers and toes were always blue, I had chilblains in the middle of the summer.
When I asked my doctor if I should try Alpha Blockers because they don't effect your heart he said "just drink a can of redbull 3-4 times a day"
So that's what I did.
It wasn't until I changed doctors and she asked me about my tea and coffee habits that it fully dawned on me just how much caffeine I was having.
I completely forgot tea has caffeine, I'd have 5-8 cups a day, plus 3 no-doze pills, 2 red bulls and a ristretto on most work days. On weekends I'd have 3-4 teas, 2-3 red bulls, 2 coffees and a caffeine based pre-workout.
My resting heart rate during all this was about 58bpm....and I slept like a log.
Anyway, my new doctor was horrified and I'm on alpha blockers now. Still no migraines, I've had to cut out everything caffeinated except 3 cups of tea a day, my resting heart rate is 67bpm....but now I have orthostatic hypotension which kinda sucks. Not as bad as taking trucker crack just so my he would remember to beat. I also struggle with intermittent bouts of insomnia now, which is weird.
I, too am horrified that an actual doctor with a doctorate in medicine would suggest that a patient pound multiple energy drinks instead of I dunno, using medicine that you even suggested.
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.
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').
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
...which is why the sign also says it's as much caffeine as coffee.
That part is actually what's misleading. I don't know anybody who gets 20 or 30 oz cups of dark roast drip coffee. 10 oz is a more reasonable size. A more useful comparison would be that one lemonade is like having two or three dark roast coffees.
I'm guessing you're not in the US with your thoughts on drink sizes, but remember that this happened in the US.
A Dunkin Large is a 20oz hot coffee or 32oz Iced Coffee, and yes you can ask for "no ice" which is common enough they finally had to make it an upcharge. They ALSO sell an XL in my area, which is a 24oz hot. A 10oz here is called a "Small" and they don't sell many of those. Usually just to people like my 80 year old mother-in-law.
...except that Panera's standard size for hot coffee is a 16oz, and the large is 20oz. And we the complaint keeps saying "dark roast" because their light roast coffee matches these lemonades for total caffeine content (384 for a large vs 390 for a 30oz lemonade).
Nothing about this drink is anywhere out of proportion of a typical coffee drink in the US.
Do they have that information on the drive through or the app though?
That's a super good question, it's not clear, but it's also not clear if that's how she bought the drink.
How visible is that sign from the order counter? Also, visually handicapped customers would have no idea.
It's self serve, unless it was a drive through pickup order.
To be fair, the average person is probably not going to really know how much caffeine is a lot of caffeine if you just give them the number, and the fact that people usually drink higher volumes of lemonade than dark coffee might lead to confusion as well. Plus, people don't generally expect caffeine in lemonade, so it's easy to imagine someone just going for the big flavor label and just figuring the smaller stuff is just nutrition labels and ignoring it.
I'm not really sure the best way to label this, it doesn't seem like a great product idea at all tbh, but given the combination of potentially dangerous amounts of caffeine and it being a product one wouldn't normally expect to contain any, I'd think that the labelling should be set up in a way as to be impossible to make assumptions about or ignore. Like, make it as big as the flavor label, in a box of a different color usually used for warnings like red or bright orange or something, and mention that the quantity of caffeine involved can be dangerous to those sensitive in addition to just the number.
I mean, the label already says "has as much caffeine as coffee". Short of only selling caffeine at a dispensary with giant warnings, I'm not sure there's any action that could or should be taken.
As a caffeine fiend and energy drink afficianado, holy fucking shit that an obnoxious amount of caffeine in a fountain drink imo
I'm with you, this needs to be sold individually in cans not free pourable.
If you have a heart condition or generally just a high sensitivity to caffeine, it's pretty important to know how much is a lot. The vast majority of people do not have any serious issues consuming 300mg or so of caffeine, so putting a bunch of big scary labels on this stuff just seems like overkill. For example, if you have a peanut allergy, it's generally on you to check the allergen list in the fine print, or if you have Celiac disease, you need to either buy stuff specifically labeled gluten-free or confirm with a restaurant, manufacturer, etc.
The fact that all of their signs have not just one, but three separate indicators ("charged", as much caffeine as coffee, and the specific caffeine amount) for anyone who might have a sensitivity is enough to show Panera's due diligence in my opinion.
I do get your point that people wouldn't automatically assume there's caffeine in Panera's random juice drinks, but caffeine is absolutely everywhere right now. I'd personally love for caffeine to be required to be listed in the nutrition label of drinks (or food that contains it) so you would know how much is in a Mountain Dew or Coke. But until that happens, I don't see how Panera could be seen as liable in this situation.
400mg of caffeine is not potentially dangerous unless you're one of the unlucky few people who have a heart condition. Even then, people with heart conditions aren't necessarily dropping dead because they drank some caffeine.
America is a place of personal feeedom but not personal accountability it seems.
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.
Isn't all soda essentially just sugar and food coloring?
And water.
Don't forget the carbonic acid!
That's just the CO2 mixed in the water
like from the toilet?
BRAWNDO. ITS GOT WHAT PLANTS CRAVE
That ”sparkling water” is still carbonic acid.
Just drink water.
why does the sprite tap have sparkling water and not sprite?
Sprite is "sparkling water" plus syrup. There's usually a second button on lemonade and lemon-lime soda which holds the syrup.
If restaurants just served sparkling water or mineral water I would be way more inclined to order drinks. But nooo, we have to have a society that normalizes liquid candy and alcohol 🥴
Restaurants do serve just soda/sparkling water, you just never asked for it before.
Classic sit down restaurants, yes. I’ve never seen it in a fast food restaurant.
“Do you have the button on the Sprite that leyd you get just soda water?”
“What? You want water?”
“Sparkling water, from the sprite fountain”
“So… Sprite?”
“No, I can see it from here, you know how you get water for water cups from the lemonade one? The Sprite has one of those extra buttons too.”
“I have to charge you for Sprite, you should just get a Sprite.”
“Look the line is backing up, can I just Sprite with no syrup please, I’ll pay for a soda.”
“I guess so…? I have to ask the manager.”
😫
Frankly, I'd totally count it as free like the regular water, at least if the soda fountain is self-serve.
Most do have it if they have a soda fountain. You might have to ask for it. You're right that it's not normalized, so you might have to ask for it, but I always served sparkling water on request, and that's in a fairly rural town in South Dakota.
A lot of the fountain machines I've used also have a soda water secondary option on one of the drinks. There's usually a plain water one, too.
I've seen plain (still) water, never sparkling water. Maybe it's regional. Very few people in the US drink plain sparkling water.
I've worked at several restaurants here in the US, and they all had both sparkling and still water from the fountain
You also might be surprised by how many guests would order sparkling water
I was referring to the "soda water" as "sparkling water" per the OP. I don't really know what the difference is tbh.
I don't think there is a difference, though I could be wrong. Soda water is just water and carbonic acid. Sparkling water I've tried tasted like that plus some fruit flavouring but no sugar, so I've assumed that plain sparkling water is just soda water.
I live in the US and get sparkling water from the beverage fountain frequently. It’s usually there as a separate little lever on one of the sodas. Maybe you just aren’t noticing it. I’ve found it to be pretty common.
I agree it may be regional. Seltzer is very popular in NYC, where I am. I once overhead flight attendants on a flight discussing how much seltzer they had to have on hand because they were headed to NYC.
oh Ive never seen it served that way. Thanks
"This new trend "
It's not really new. It's that the cane sugar sodas cost more to make, which means cost more to buy. You can taste the difference, but you have to actually care to be willing to pay the increased price.
Jones has always done it. Coca Cola used to release it "Mexican Coca Cola" in my area every few months at $3/bottle.
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.
I disagree. Don't get me wrong - fuck Panera in general, but I'm all for more products being offered so long as they're properly labeled which this was. Also with a name like charged lemonade it heavily omplies it's not normal lemonade. There's an argument to be made here about personal responsibilities and reading labels.
Charged lemonadw to me would indicate extra sweet not cat piss gaurana.
Well you should probably read what's in it then if you're not sure lol.
Then look at the label and see that it says its caffeine content, as well as comparing it to coffee
Like, other than not selling it at all, there's not much else they could've done here
Yeah it's a tragic story, but I don't think Panera is at fault here. What I would like for them to do is update their signage to be even more specific as a result of this. There's no legal requirement to, and I don't think a court will find them liable, but no matter how you spin it, this was an absolute tragedy for the girl and her family. Caffeine overdose is an incredibly unpleasant feeling when you drink one more coffee than you should. The poor girl. It would be kind of Panera to make changes because of it.
Agreed. I mentioned this in another comment but I'm wondering if she was picking up an online order? The article was not clear about that, but it would certainly be a different story if the lemonade wasn't properly labeled on the online menu
Very true
The beverage contains 390mg, which is equivalent to 6.5 cups of coffee. I hope this will be used as a case study for other businesses on how to properly label your drinks and further increase transparancy about ingredients used in beverages.
A typical drip coffee contains roughly 100mg of caffeine per 8 oz cup, which means a 30 oz cup of coffee would contain very similar amounts to one of the charged lemonades in question. Or course, caffeine varies wildly in coffee depending on exactly how it's brewed as well as bean origin and roast, so you could easily see well over 400mg in a 30oz drink. And let's not even get started on adding extra shots of espresso.
For what it's worth, while most of what you said is accurate, espresso contains considerably less caffeine than people tend to think it does. What makes espresso so intense on that front is the concentration per volume, and how fast espresso beverages are consumed in comparison to drip coffee. Drinking a 12oz cup of drip over an hour or two is pretty standard. A double shot cappuccino though, not so much.
Pretty standard where? Literally nobody I know drinks coffee this slow.
I don't think it's that uncommon to sit down with a mug of coffee and sip on it over the course of an hour while working or having a chat with someone but maybe my 10 years of specialty coffee experience led me astray.
After about 15 minutes coffee tastes disgusting to me. Gets so stale and gross. After an hour I would gag and spit it out.
Good quality coffee should continue to develop in flavor substantially as it cools and is actually quite interesting to taste across the temperature spectrum. I'm sorry that hasn't been your experience. I do understand coffee is not for everybody, but I do believe if you have the opportunity to experience well prepared craft coffee it has the potential to change that view.
Think of cooling coffee having a similar effect as decanting wine, because high end coffee is actually extremely similar to wine. The fruit is fermented in massive containers in a very similar fashion to wine making, imparting a large volume of complex flavors. The act of roasting coffee is actually one of the most difficult sciences in the culinary world, to the point that Michelin starred chefs want nothing to do with it - it's actually that difficult to execute well. It is pretty easy for somebody to grab a bag of green coffee and absolutely destroy it. It's incredibly rare for someone to do a coffee its justice. And even then, if the person preparing it once it is roasted doesn't know what they are doing, they can take the best coffee in the world and make it taste awful.
I'm sorry but you do not sound like a coffee person. I cannot comprehend a world where I live in where I get tired of my beverage of coffee after 15 minutes because it became disgusting.
6.5 thimble-sized cups. Compare to an average large coffee (431mg/20oz from Dunkin), or to the average amount consumed by coffee drinkers (~200mg for adults on average, with the 90th percentile being 300-400mg depending on the age group).
This touches on yet another conflating factor. The personal tolerance to caffeine varies wildly from person to person. Some can't have even one cup a day, while others will down an entire pot and just shrug.
This is an absolute tragedy, but Panera is not legally liable. They should however respect her death by improving their signage and giving much more information. A warning that high consumption can be fatal with rare, unknown conditions seems appropriate.
Yeah, I agree. "As much caffeine as our coffee" should be replaced with an explicit number in milligrams and be presented in a standardized label format. It's important information.
No, the responsibility is solely on the consumer. It's clearly labeled as having caffeine. No one is forcing anybody to ingest anything against their will. It's not the company nor governments responsibility to protect oneself against their own stupidity.
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.
The supplement industry is rife with problems. A former co-worker of mine used to buy this pre-work out powder on the Internet and he said some batches would be so potent he felt like he was going to jump out of his skin and then sometimes it was really weak and he'd have to take several doses.
That sounds like some really shoddy manufacturing practices.
citation needed
Here is the original FDA letter to VPX regarding White Heat. The chemical they are focusing on is 4-Amino-2-Methylpentane Citrate also known as 1,3-Dimethylbutylamine, DMBA, 2-amino-4-methylpentane, AMP citrate, and 4-methyl-2-pentanamine (according to the FDA letter). Upon further research, it seems like, although the structure of the compound is similar to an amphetamine, the actual mechanism of action of these and similar compounds, such as DMAA, still isn’t fully known. So it was a bit inaccurate of me to call it an “amphetamine analogue” since they might not work in a similar manner.
I don't know about that drink of theirs and have the same doubts as you but here in nl some companies produce ever-changing molecules that are close to the real stuff but different enough that the specific compound isn't banned yet. The one I know of only sells to other European countries.
That product had nothing on the one before it; Clenbutrix. I used to take it all the time you had to squirt it in the back of your throat with the supplied syringe. Daily use would make my throat and tongue sore, and if it hit your tongue well.. good luck with those taste buds lol.
It's crazy they got away with that for as long as they did.
They way I learned Dr. Pepper has caffeine is a friend in high school with a similar undiagnosed condition dying after drinking one.
Jeez, that's terrifying.
This is so saddening, I can't imagine what her loved ones must be going through. ☹️
Heartbreaking? Did you use a pun?
No that was coincidental :/
Nice
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.
And nearly 3/4 cup of sugar. The sugar alone can trigger heart arrythmias. (I have a heart arrythmia and can't tolerate much sugar.)
30 fl oz is A LOT of beverage, a normal sized energy drink is more like 8-16 fl oz, and usually has only 100-200 mg caffeine tops. I've noticed a lot of 300 mg drinks start to get phased out in favor of drinks that only have 120 mg, which is actually a pretty reasonable amount for an adult.
For instance, I'm about 190 lbs and I need close to 250 mg to adequately feel its effects for exercise, and there are studies that show this is an appropriate amount (mg/lb) for exercise benefits.
However, even though 30 fl oz with 390 mg is about in line with the smaller drinks for caffeine/volume, I think ideally they should just not offer such a large size drink.
Any free market absolutists want to try to explain to me how situations like this should be handled?
Is this poor girl just the first "collateral damage" that allows the market to (eventually) fix itself? Is it her own fault for not being an expert on caffeinated beverages before buying the drink?
I would be curious to know if the caffeine content is listed by Panera just for the sake of being curious. They could actually make an argument in court stating she should have seen the caffeine content at the time ordering.
I think the next argument to be made is that the caffeine content is for consumers without those conditions. They could simply state, "how could the company have known, because our beverages and the contents of caffeine are risky as is."
I would like to know how much God damned caffeine has to be in something to cause someone like this to die. That is wild to me. I mean I wouldn't drink more than one Red Bull in a day and things like 5-Hour Energy legit made me paranoid and gave me the shakes. I know where my body tolerance is.
I think I would be curious to know if the risks were posted or rather the caffeine content was posted. Most people with peanut allergies are not peanut experts but they stay aware of not being able to eat things deep fried in peanuts.
What has happened to her is really sad it's not a question of whether she is collateral damage. It is a question of whether legally companies like Panera are posting warnings and caffeine content listings. I would also like to know if this is an employee mistake. Did someone accidentally over caffeinate the beverage.
Lots of questions here. I feel sorry for the family and it is unfortunate small things like this can kill a person. It makes you realize how small life can be and how vulnerable we are. I do feel like there is a responsibility on both parties sides but her responsibility is asking whether she knew the amount of caffeine content. Their responsibility would be determining whether that caffeine content was visible and there for her to see or even hear at the time of purchase or whether warnings should be posted by caffeine the same as they are posted by a boiling drink or food or whether something contains, nuts or eggs, etc. Additionally, should they legally be allowed to sell something with that amount of caffeine.
It's absolutely about her being collateral damage.
If we weren't living in a 24/7 internet/news world (say, even ~20 years ago), we wouldn't have access to news articles about this kind of thing. The articles likely wouldn't exist at all. The vast majority of consumers would have no idea that this girl died from this drink, and people who enjoy to consume it (heart condition or no), will continue putting themselves at risk. Panera would still sell this product, and the profit margin is massive. Why would they stop when literally nobody knows the drink killed a girl?
And this would keep happening until "the invisible hand" of the market corrects things, if it ever does. Because it only really could if enough people heard about the dangers of this beverage to literally put them out of business. And we've already established that these stories weren't a common thing until recently.
How many people do you think would need to die for that happen?
This honestly isn't even a great example, but it still works. Just look at any dangerous product that ruined or ended countless lives in the not so distant past, before the government was forced to step in to regulate (asbestos, thalidomide, lead, CFCs, etc etc). Note that all of those things would never have been outlawed/regulated if the government hadn't stepped in. If we would have just sat back and allowed the free market to handle it, millions more would be dead, and there would still be an ever growing hole in the ozone layer.
All just collateral damage in the bullshit concept of free markets
I feel like Panera has lost its way after JAB bought it. This wouldn't fly before and some of their menu items now are just pure excess.
Ever since "casual dining" became the buzzword for restaurant investors.