Should energy drinks note the caffeine content? (Tony Cenicola/The New York Times)Super-caffeinated energy drinks popular with teenagers, with names like Red Bull, Monster and Full Throttle, should carry warning labels, says a group of prominent caffeine researchers.
In an article published this month in the journal Drug and Alcohol Dependence, researchers from Johns Hopkins University say caffeinated energy drinks should carry labels that note caffeine doses and warn of potential health risks for consumers.
The caffeine content of energy drinks varies from 50 milligrams to more than 500 milligrams per serving. A regular 12-ounce cola drink has about 35 milligrams of caffeine, and a 6-ounce cup of brewed coffee has 80 to 150 milligrams of caffeine.
Some energy drinks contain the caffeine equivalent of 14 cans of Coca-Cola, said Roland Griffiths, a professor of behavioral biology and one of the study authors. “Yet the caffeine amounts are often unlabeled, and few include warnings about the potential health risks of caffeine intoxication,” he said.
Dr. Griffiths notes that caffeine intoxication is a recognized clinical syndrome included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders and the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases. It is marked by nervousness, anxiety, restlessness, insomnia, gastrointestinal upset, tremors, rapid heartbeats, restlessness and pacing, and in rare cases, even death.
In a 2007 survey of 496 college students, 51 percent reported consuming at least one energy drink during the last month. Of these energy drink users, 29 percent reported “weekly jolt and crash episodes,” and 19 percent reported heart palpitations from drinking energy drinks, the report stated. This same survey found that 27 percent of the students said they mixed energy drinks and alcohol at least once in the past month.
“Alcohol adds another level of danger,” Dr. Griffiths said. “Caffeine in high doses can give users a false sense of alertness that provides incentive to drive a car or in other ways put themselves in danger.”
The American Beverage Association, in a statement, said the study wrongly focused on “novelty” brands rather than mainstream energy drinks that make up the bulk of the market. The group said mainstream beverages contain moderate amounts of caffeine that are often less than those found in popular coffeehouse beverages.
“It’s unfortunate that the authors of this article would attempt to lump all energy drinks together in a rhetorical attack when the facts of their review clearly distinguishes the mainstream responsible players from novelty companies seeking attention and increased sales based solely on extreme names and caffeine content,” said the statement.
Dr. Griffiths and his colleagues are currently collecting case reports of intoxication from energy drinks in children and adolescents. For more information, go to www.bpru.org/energydrinks/
And for more on how energy drinks may be linked to risky teen behavior, read my recent Well column, “Taste for Quick Boost Tied to Taste for Risk.”
To learn more about the caffeine content of the beverages your teen is drinking, check out the Web site Energy Fiend, which lists caffeine content of dozens of different beverages. Although I haven’t checked every item for accuracy, I have checked several of the listings and found the data to be reliable.
Healthy living doesn't happen at the doctor's office. The road to better health is paved with the small decisions we make every day. It's about the choices we make when we buy groceries, drive our cars and hang out with our kids. Join columnist Tara Parker-Pope as she sifts through medical research and expert opinions for practical advice to help readers take control of their health and live well every day. You can reach Ms. Parker-Pope at 
The easiest and most pleasurable way to eat well is to cook. Recipes for Health offers recipes with an eye towards empowering you to cook healthy meals every day. 
From 1 to 25 of 64 Comments
not a bad idea to have caffeine content on labels. Too much caffeine can lead to anxiety attacks.
— fjWarning labels should be applied to any drink that has more than 200 mg caffeine per container, NOT per “serving,” since most consumers drink the whole container.
— jackFROM TPP — Interesting. Why do you draw the line at 200 mg?
For the most part, I agree with the beverage industry here. A venti iced coffee, from Starbucks, has 265 mg of caffeine. That’s more than three times the amount in a standard can of RedBull (80 mg). I have no problem with the concept of disclosing the caffeine content on packaging labels, but the same requirement should apply to all products containing caffeine.
FROM TPP — Interesting, but one difference I see is that energy drinks are targeted at teens. Caffeine affects a young person’s body differently than an older, regular coffee drinker. Also, energy drinks are served cold and are sweet and consumed faster than hot coffee drinks. I’m not saying one should be labeled and the other should not — but there are differences in the drinks. Still I see no harm in asking coffee drinks to carry caffeine content as well. Caffeine pills sold in the drugstore have to carry specifics on caffeine content, why not everything else?
— NathanIt is so important for internaitonal students who are not aware of these dangers in a foreign country, it will help them make wise choices. As a mother of two children who are studing in North America I am always concerned about them making unhealthy choices.
— Rabia KhanI wish this article had included a list of the various energy drinks and their caffeine amounts.
FROM TPP — Yes I think i will add a link. The web site Energy Fiend has the most complete listing of energy drinks and caffeine content that I have found. I have spot checked several of the drinks and found it to be accurate.
— Jim FlemingHow is it that the beverage industry does not want a label of caffeine on their product? If their product is safe, then the label will do no harm. If not, then they are like the cigarette makers who have flaunted their disregard for public health and lied to the American People and Congress!
We can never put corporate interests above our own, otherwise we wind up in a situation like we have now on wall street where the markets were saying trust us? I guess we should trust the ‘mainstream responsible players’ to do the right thing?
— Daniel Thornenergy drinks are certainly targeted at teens and young adults, but you wouldn’t believe how many high schoolers i see at my local starbucks ordering highly caffeinated and sweetened drinks (both hot and cold).
when i was in high school, i used to have a triple shot of espresso on a regular basis. over a decade later, i can’t have caffeine after 3pm for fear of the jitters and stomach pains. adolescent bodies may process caffeine differently, but here i am pushing 30 and my body can barely tolerate it.
i don’t see a problem in adding a warning label about mixing high caffeine drinks with alcohol. the other symptoms of caffeine intoxication are less worrisome to me, however.
— ericaDr. Griffiths has been at this sort of research for 14 years or more, yet the evidence is slender for how big a problem this is, numbers-wise. And for him to wonder whether caffeinated drinks are a gateway drug to other drug usage is simply alarmist, in my opinion. A Venti-sized Starbucks brewed coffee (24 ounces) has around 400 mgs of caffeine. Is he proposing that every paper cup of Starbucks coffee carry similar warning labels? I wonder if he is in search of funding money? Caffeine, in various drinks, has been consumed by societies for thousands of years. That young people need to learn how to use such a drug in moderation makes sense, but at what point are such attempts at safety-labelling going too far?
— TomI have blogged on this in the past. I know of no studies that say a set amount of caffeine is bad. Some people seem more sensitive than others. 400 mg appears to be the max for most anybody. 200 mg is my max before the heart palpitations and shakiness set in. Some can’t tolerate any.
My point is we don’t have a cutoff. Maybe Dr. Griffiths is working on one with proof of where real danger sets in.
I wonder how teens are going to pay attentions to a generalized label “may cause symptoms” “don’t mix with alcohol, etc”
All should have amount of caffeine content per container on label so we can make a choice.
— James Hubbard, M.D., M.P.H.The beverage industry has been fairly strategic about matters of caffeine and kids…as far back as I can remember, anyway, and I’m no spring chicken.
Kids love caffeine. It’s a kind of “speed,” and it’s also a mood-elevator. The more manufacturers can get into beverages for kids, the more product they use…Mountain Dew, for example, is mostly targeted to teens, and it has a comparatively high level of caffeine. It’s addicting. The total experience of the flavor, the sugar, the carbonation, combined with the caffeine, creates a pattern of habitual consumption. A whole series of triggers and responses emerges. Suddenly, one repeatedly wants the same drink, with all the same sensations, together with the caffeine kick.
Plain and simple, it’s a way to addict kids/teens to a sugary beverages. And the manufacturers know it. They will weasel around this (as tobacco companies did about getting kids into smoking), but it’s true. I’m sure a lot of people who actually WORK in these companies don’t realize that this is the real purpose, because it is not too commonly discussed.
In the case of drink mixers, I can imagine that the effect is worse, because the conditioning for the feeling from alcohol is mixed into this. It’s just one more factor contributing to the desire to do it, again, the next time. A double whammy…enjoyable feelings from caffeine, combined with enjoyable feelings from alcohol–plus the distinctive flavor of a drink like Red Bull.
So even beyond the danger from caffeine intoxication, and drunken driving, is the issue of enticing young people to drink more alcohol and more sugar (although I believe there is an artificially sweetened version of Red Bull, and this is probably true for other brands).
Maybe there is nothing to do about this, in terms of regulation, but it is only fair to at least label the drinks with warnings. I guess one backlash might be that teens and young adults actually like the idea of drinking dangerous levels of caffeine….but….
— WesleyFollowup to #2. Practical reasons. Unless you wanted to start putting warning labels on many Starbucks coffee beverages such as a Grande with a shot of of expresso, you’d have to draw the line right around here.
Even 100 mg may be too much for someone who’s heart is sensitive to arrythmogenic substances such as caffeine. These substances can trigger dangerous heart rhythms in sensitive individuals, possibly leading to heart failure or cardiac arrest.
— jackSensationalism much? So Red Bull (pictured above) contains 40-75% as much caffeine as coffee.
Its nice to know these guys have PhD’s and the author considers her self a “journalist.”
“The caffeine content of energy drinks varies from 50 milligrams to more than 500 milligrams per serving. A regular 12-ounce cola drink has about 35 milligrams of caffeine, and a 6-ounce cup of brewed coffee has 80 to 150 milligrams of caffeine.
Some energy drinks contain the caffeine equivalent of 14 cans of Coca-Cola…”
— DaveFROM TPP — What’s your point? Red Bull has 80 mg of caffeine a can. A can of coke has 34.5. Wired X344 has 344. Fixx has 500 mg. And as I’ve said before, teens don’t typically chug down a Starbucks grande latte AND Starbucks doesn’t target teens at extreme sports events and with names like “Blow” “Beaver Buzz” and ”Bo Koo Energy.”
One thought: caffeine labeling might serve as a reminder to folks that caffeine IS a drug and it DOES have effects on mood and behavior.
I’m frankly amazed at the amount of caffeinated beverages some of the teenagers I know ingest. I also am frustrated at trying to teach a church Youth Group lesson where half of the kids are so hypercaffeinated that they can’t sit still and pay attention.
I wonder how many of the health/behavior/attention problems we see in children and teens are related to over consumption of caffeine.
I once saw a couple in a chain restaurant order a Pepsi, put it in their toddler’s bottle, and then express concern and amazement when the child was cranky and “hyper” 20 minutes later.
I tend to think that people under 12 or 14 should not consume any caffeine. But of course most would disagree with me on that.
— rickiI don’t see why this is even an issue — if the FDA was run with any competence, it would have been done long ago and without debate or delay.
In order to make informed choices, the consumer needs information.
— meechWhile I disagree with the idea that it’s time to require warning labels on caffeinated beverages (unless it were a fairly vague warning, since the data still don’t support any particular conclusions except that in some instances some level of caffeine *may be harmful to *some* people), I do agree that it’s time to start requiring all such beverages to disclose the amount of caffeine, both per serving and per container.
Though I will play devil’s advocate for a moment: putting that information on all labels could induce kids, and others chasing highs, to go for the ones with the most caffeine.
I suspect that info is already out there in that crowd, though, and I believe in general that more information is always a good thing.
— nlgWith a little more thought, I believe that this is one of those issues that needs more light of day, for the public to be made aware.
Deciding cut-off levels for warnings will keep the regulators in gridlock for a long time (I hope not, but…).
And do not underestimate the power of manufacturers to advocate for themselves with the FDA. It is political, of course.
Maybe it will get done, but of course, there are those ambiguities about freshly brewed coffee beverages (Starbucks, where the frothy, sweet beverages get kids started at an early age….and get them up to drinking coffee beverages at an early age).
Anyway, I’m glad to see this as the subject of “Well.” Personally, I love caffeine, but I want to be aware of how much I’m drinking.
— WesleyFROM TPP — I, too, am a fan of caffeine. (The Well blog is fueled by it, in fact) But like you, I want to know what I’m drinking, whether it’s in coffee or a cold beverage. There are times I might choose more caffeine — and I always want caffeine information on the drinks my daughter consumes.
Aside from warning labels, I think it’s important to consider the SOURCE and QUALITY of the caffeine. Caffiene from coffee and tea are NATURALLY occuring. I’m not so sure where the “caffiene” in these drinks come from (perhaps sythensized in lab?). It’s like high fructose corn syrup is to sugar cane, or cocaine is to the coca leaf. The former are HIGHLY processed, the latter are in a more natural state.
— IdealistI think the drink companies are going about this completely wrong. If I were a marketer for these energy drinks, I would enthusiastically embrace labeling requirements detailing how much caffeine is contained in a can of my product. I would then market it as a feature, not a bug. After all, most consumers of energy drinks are fully aware that they are highly caffeinated; indeed, that’s why we drink them in the first place (it sure isn’t for the taste). Most teenagers I know would actively seek out the energy drink with the most caffeine if such information was readily availible.
— DaveIt’s funny, like poster 2 said - Starbucks iced coffee has so much more caffeine than Red Bull. When I’m cramming, I don’t even bother with Red Bulls, because they do absolutely nothing to help me stay awake, especially compared with coffee.
— AAYour mention of death as a possible side effect seems to be fear mongering. According to wikipedia (I know, not the most trusted source), the “[median lethal dose] LD50 of caffeine in humans is dependent on weight and individual sensitivity and estimated to be about 150 to 200 milligrams per kilogram of body mass”.
Even at the highest level you provide, 500 mg per serving, you would still need around 15 servings to be lethal in a light weight person.
— BenNot to be mean, but I think it is kind of ignorant to say that teens do not drink Starbucks, or coffee for that matter. While there won’t be as many teenagers in a Starbucks as there are adults, I see plenty of highschool and college age kids drinking ‘designer coffee,’ usually purchased by a parent.
— TaylorI definitely agree that caffeine content should be on the label of these “energy drinks” (and for quid pro quo, on other caffeinated beverages as well). These drinks are definitely being marketed to kids, who may not have the insight to limit their caffeine intake.
Heavy caffeine intake (>700 mg/d) has been associated with increased risk of cardiac arrest. All consumers should be informed as to how much caffeine they are taking in. I enjoy caffeinated beverages, but it is always good to be well-informed about the choices one is making.
— JTWhere’s the proof that excessive caffeine is bad for you? What have studies judged as being “too much”? Putting warning labels on highly caffeinated drinks risks sending an unfounded message that some drinks are more dangerous than others.
— SophiaHere’s an idea: label content in drinks bottled/canned for individual retail sale. No warning, let the data speak for itself.
No label on coffee drinks so long as the caffeine is not added. Why not? It’s a matter of practicality and balance. The purpose of a label is to provide information. No one on the planet can credibly claim not to know that coffee contains caffeine; a label would be of no benefit to someone that ignorant.
— BradThank you for posting about this. The lack of labeling for caffeine content has long been a source of frustration for me. Caffeine is an addictive substance, as anyone who has tried to give up their morning cup of coffee knows, and I think consumers should be able to be informed about the caffeine content of the foods they consume. Thanks also for the Energy Fiend link: very helpful.
— Iolanthe