It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"FDA Bans Caffeine In Alcoholic Beverages?"

page: 20
57
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Reiman
 


When are they not kids? This concept of "college kids" baffles me. 18, 19, 20, 21. I hate the age. Depending on context you can call them "kids" or "adults" to swing the emotional argument in your favor.

We just legislated a bunch of 25 year old "kids" have to be covered by their parents health insurance while we have thousands of 18 year old "men" fighting in a desert.




posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockstar02
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


These are stupid kids drinking this, not your average, intellectual ATS member.


Over the last few months and the threads I am seeing here I would not be inclined to put the words, average, ATS member and intellectual together.

I'm deadly f king serious in case you think I am just having a laugh.

I would go for ; 'your average , insane ATS member'
edit on 17-11-2010 by JohnySeagull because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Easy fix.Just do Starbucks Espresso Doubles as a chaser after every beer.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi
What? no more Spanish coffee?

Oh wait - it's alcoholic energy drinks...

So, what's the difference between them, then?
edit on 16-11-2010 by LadySkadi because: (no reason given)


I guess there is no real difference, but I do not think that too many people would sit and have 6-10 spanish coffee's, but I can see and have seen people pound back the same amount of Red Bull/ Vodka's. I think the ban is only on premixed
caffeine/alcohol drinks that you could go and buy a six pack of. I have to agree with the ban personally because in excess this is a very dangerous drink. Nothing worse than a drunk that is also bouncing off the wall with a caffeine buzz. I have seen it and experienced and thought I was going to have a heart attack.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I really though about this... and decided to do some research. I figured since the FDA is making money off of alcohol primarily by liver disease... maybe caffeine was countering that liver disease. If the FDA had a decline in sales for liver disease, their market researchers would figure out what new phenomenon is preventing the liver disease that comes primarily from alcohol.

And as the reality of the FDA's tendencies for corporate greed would have it...



Good news to all coffee lovers out there. We were taught to avoid drinking caffeinated drinks to avoid diseases, and that it is unhealthy if done in excess. While it is still advisable not to drink coffee in excess, science has recently discovered some very healthy effects of caffeine on the liver.

Though it is not often that one finds heath benefits in coffee, the effects of caffeine on the liver may change our minds. There were about 6,000 people who were at risk for developing diseases that affects the liver. Some from hepatitis, obesity, excessive drinking and other elements that are widely known to cause liver malfunction; during the research, the people were ask how much tea, coffee or any caffeinated sodas they consume.

Studies show that the people who drank more caffeinated drinks were the people less likely to develop a disease in the liver. It was an interesting result. But this study is not the end-all and be-all of things. The effects of caffeine on the liver have not yet been signed, sealed and delivered by researchers yet. So do not go around drinking every coffee cup you find. Excessive caffeine or excessive anything for that matter, is bad for your health. Just drink caffeine regularly and do not think too much of it. And be open to future research about caffeine's effects on us.


source
edit on 17-11-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-11-2010 by Brood because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


An 18 year old fighting for his life, the life of the man next to him, and the lives of all us Americans is defiantly a man. He has a great responsibility only a man can partake in. A 20 year old sitting in the dorm room with his 19 year old girlfriend shotgunning Four Lokos... They're defiantly kids.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reiman
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


An 18 year old fighting for his life, the life of the man next to him, and the lives of all us Americans is defiantly a man. He has a great responsibility only a man can partake in. A 20 year old sitting in the dorm room with his 19 year old girlfriend shotgunning Four Lokos... They're defiantly kids.


Fortunately our wise overlords have decided that the man in question is not legally able to consume alcohol.

However, he is able to get blown up in a foreign country while protecting local heroin producers.

Thank god for that, he might consume some Jooze and die before the tribal warlords have a chance to kill him.


edit on 17-11-2010 by mnemeth1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Reiman
 


So can that 18 year old soldier shotgun a four loco if he wants to or should he be subjected to the "kids" ban?

If we're drawing arbitrary lines I just want to be sure we connect all the dots.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:49 PM
link   
“Most people are obviously too foolish to do what's best for them.”

And you or some corrupt government knows what’s best for them? Do you recall that this is supposed to be a FREE country. That means people have FREEDOM - you know, the ability to choose to live their lives however the hell they want as long as it doesn’t infringe on another person’s rights?

What the hell do you or I or anybody care if someone makes foolish decisions! What may be a foolish decision to you may be a brilliant decision to me. Who is right? Everyone is responsible for ONE person - himself. Worry about yourself, and the rest will fall into line.

“It's not about controlling people's ability to think and act”

Really? Making a law that forbids a person from doing ANYthing absolutely falls under the category of “controlling people’s ability to think and act”.

“What is right is not necessarily what's lawful, it's what's ethical and moral. Each individual has to determine this on their own; however, collectively, we've come a long way at gaining general understandings of things.”

I agree that what is right is not always lawful. I also agree with a person’s ability to determine what is right- for himself- on his own. If you admit that it is up to a person to figure out for himself what is right or wrong for his own life, then why do you in the same breath condone creating a law that does NOT allow that person to THINK and ACT for himself????

I would venture to guess that the ‘part’ you would like to do is to cut down on the corruption in this world. That starts at one place: freedom. I think your ‘part’ would best to be done in focusing your energy on protecting us from arbitrary laws that aim to erode our freedom and take away our ability to decide for ourselves.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 02:53 PM
link   
Alright, excuse my language. I wasn't trying to bring up some protect the kids, or when is a kid a man argument. All I wanted to do was try to clarify that it was premixed drinks like Four Loko getting banned due to abuse from young adults and not normal mixed drinks. That is all.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Personally, I don't see how it's anybody's business but my own regarding what I put into my body if I'm not harming anyone else. There was an idea awhile back that human beings were accountable for their own actions, while simultaneously enjoying things like personal freedom. It's kind of old fashioned nowadays, but that doesn't mean it's not worthwhile. I find it disturbing that there are people here trying to make the argument that "people don't know what's good for them, so the government has to tell them." Are you serious right now? How someone espousing such a thing ended up here is pretty hard to fathom. That really makes me feel ill. Maybe this planet is fked, after all. And we wonder why we're not free...


The late philosopher Hicks said it best: What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I f*%k, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet? And for those of you having a little moral dilemma on how to answer this, I'll answer for you. NONE of your F*%KING business."



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Good news for my fellow beer nerds that enjoy a coffee stout or porter. They aren't affected by this proposal.

www.fda.gov...



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by thektotheg
 


This:

"Personally, I don't see how it's anybody's business but my own regarding what I put into my body if I'm not harming anyone else. "

Is utterly ridiculous.

You might consume rat poison or eat salty foods, neither of which are good for you.

If I don't have the ability to dictate what you can consume, you might hurt yourself.

It's for your own good that I run your life.

Trust me, I'm smarter than you.

I have a liberal arts degree.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by WickettheRabbit
 


Considering some coffee stouts contain as much caffeine as a cup of coffee, the same amount in this four loco crap (even more than if you consider volume served over volume package) then all we have here is more government hypocrisy and inconsistent application of the law.

Yay, government. # up some more please.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   
So nice to see that they care about keeping alcohol fairly safe, while lacing hundreds of food products and almost every chewing gum with cancer causing aspertame.
edit on 17-11-2010 by squad51 because: spelling error

edit on 17-11-2010 by squad51 because: spelling error



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by WickettheRabbit
 


Considering some coffee stouts contain as much caffeine as a cup of coffee, the same amount in this four loco crap (even more than if you consider volume served over volume package) then all we have here is more government hypocrisy and inconsistent application of the law.

Yay, government. # up some more please.



Yeah, it's hard to drive out competitors while keeping the big boys in place if the laws are consistent and make rational sense, while at the same time protecting private property rights.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mnemeth1
 


I appreciate the humor



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
This just in...The FDA bans highly dangerous and addictive stimulant drugs such as Ritalin, Dexedrine, Adderall and Cylert, to be meted out by "psychiatrists" with reckless dereliction to children and teens with supposed ADHD.
Nah...That would make too much sense.

If anything, having a combo of caffeine/alcohol based beverage would be a good thing as they seem to cancel one another out. Not too drunk, not too wired, but still able to drive. Not that I advocate drinking and driving by any means, but it seems better to have an edge when getting behind the wheel while intoxicated.

I don't think the FDA has any business meddling in the choice an adult makes about what one decides to put in their body. Caffeine is not a scheduled narcotic, and is no way comparable to coc aine or amphetamines. The LD50 on caffeine is approximately seventy cups of coffee if memory serves me correct, but I digress.

All of this comes down to personal choice. If you have high blood pressure and a liver disorder, then no, I wouldn't recommend these drinks. People need to take responsibility for their well-being and should educate themselves on potential side-effects of various said concoctions rather than let the government decide for them.

So what's next? Is the FDA going to ban gasoline, liquid paper, starting fluid, paint, etc to protect us? (All of which are used to produce altered states of consciousness. Like I needed to clarify that!)

The proverbial "boot" is comin down hard on us proles. Wake up and smell the fascism folks!



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:27 PM
link   
FYI - Not for nothing, but they are talking about food and beverage manufacturing. The FDA will not be taking away anyone's irish coffee...which btw has significantly less caffeine than one of these drinks.



posted on Nov, 17 2010 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


Considering the can has "as much caffeine as a cup of coffee" your claim would be false.

ETA:

I found this article saying equal to 5 cups of coffee.

You'd think for all the news coverage of late there would be more results for the amount of caffeine. Seems like nobody knows or nobody is reporting it.
edit on 17-11-2010 by thisguyrighthere because: news article



new topics

top topics



 
57
<< 17  18  19    21  22  23 >>

log in

join