this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2023
105 points (92.7% liked)
United States | News & Politics
7364 readers
350 users here now
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why? If they're properly informed (e.g. there's a label saying how much caffeine it has, and a comparison to other common beverages), people should be able to choose for themselves.
And what if they aren't properly informed about their own health? It's not like they have to get their blood pressure tested to order a drink.
Then I guess they'll find out real quick. The same goes if someone doesn't know they have a peanut allergy at a restaurant.
Yikes.
What's the alternative, have the store do a medical checkup or something? If customers ignore posted warnings, that's on them.
Limit one per customer. Easy.
So I can't order several for friends? That sucks.
Multiple people are dead.
And? Maybe those people shouldn't drink stuff with tons of caffeine in it. Do you also want to restrict sales of energy shots at grocery stores?
I don't want to "restrict" them, like some kind of law or something.
I'm just pointing out that they could, as a business, stop people from killing themselves with their product. "Buyer beware" just externalizes the burden of safety onto customers, and will absolutely result in more deaths. They could stop this from happening.
My understanding from other comments ITT is that the company posted warnings after the first incident. If they continued despite that, that's on the customer. Preventing people from buying something that could hurt them (but most likely won't) is silly. Just label things in such a way that people should understand the risks, and then call it good (and perhaps have cashiers mention it as well if they order multiple).
This is a recreational drug and cashiers should be empowered to intervene for the health of the customer, no different from a bartender cutting someone off when they've had too much.
Sure, I just don't think it should be expected policy. Caffeine is a very safe drug, and it only really causes problems if you have other serious health conditions.
Or if you consume extremely large amounts! Three lemonades is many many times the safe dose.
Like, at this level I think hallucinations become possible lol
Sure, but three is also many times less than the legal dose, which is something like 150-200mg/kg of body mass (Wikipedia article). According to Panera, their lemonades have ~150mg caffeine. Again from Wikipedia:
So 3 of these drinks is right in that range of the upper limit of what's reasonable, and each is about the amount in a typical energy drink (Red bull has 80mg/can, Monster has about 160mg/can). That doesn't sound excessive to me. Sure, three is a lot, but that's still not enough to cause problems unless you already have significant health risks. So as long as they have signage saying how much caffeine it has in a way customers can visualize, I honestly think that's fine.
A large lemonade contains up to 390 mg of caffeine. That's more than two Monsters.
Three lemonades is a six pack of Monster in one sitting. That's 1080 mg. What am I not seeing here? That sure seems lethal to me!
Let's assume the person is 50kg (low estimate), a lethal dose is 150mg * 50 per day, or 7500mg. Three lemonades is merely 2x the point where caffeine intoxication starts, so I'd expect the following symptoms:
And at very high levels of consumption (about 5x of those three lemonades):
None of those are life threatening, unless you have an underlying medical condition that makes you especially sensitive to caffeine. So three large lemonades would give you moderate symptoms, and those would likely go away within hours. The person in the article didn't die from caffeine overdose, they died from a heart attack, meaning they likely had significant health issues where the high caffeine load pushed their heart too far. If you'll notice, heart attack isn't one of the symptoms at all, even with a much higher caffeine load.
Huh, I guess he didn't have enough to hallucinate! Still enough to experience hearth arrhythmia, though, which can be dangerous (and was fatal in this case)
I gotta be honest, I think he's stupid for doing this to himself.
I just don't believe stupid people deserve to die.
Nor do I, but I also don't think we should restrict everyone just because of some stupid people. As the saying goes:
Put up sufficient warnings, perhaps warn them verbally before purchase, and then let people do what they want, provided it won't hurt anyone but themselves. Obviously there should be exceptions for when someone is impaired (e.g. a bar), but if they seem to be of sound mind, let adults make their own stupid decisions.
I don't expect a cashier to know that someone could die when purchasing their product, nor do I think the business is obligated to do anything more than warn when it comes to relatively harmless products like caffeinated beverages.