Archive for the ‘alcohol beverages generally’ Category
FDA and FTC Banish Four Loko and Joose
In a massive and coordinated action yesterday, the Federal Government moved to favor Red Bull and pummel other drinks with caffeine.
FDA handed a giant gift to Red Bull here.
The FTC handed a humongous present to Red Bull here.
Other actions are expected imminently, as legions of other regulators rush in to exaggerate the dangers (it looks like soda, it’s “loaded with caffeine,” it’s like a “plague” and “toxic”) and ignore evidence to the contrary. This follows many state actions in recent weeks. Presto, problem solved! We eagerly await the evidence that young people cut back on alcohol, or cut back on co-consumption of alcohol with caffeine. We hope it’s better than the current leading study; it purports to highlight the dangers of the pre-mixed products such as Four Loko, Liquid Charge, Joose and scores of others — without ever having examined any such products. Instead, the O’Brien study reviewed products so different they are not even within the scope of yesterday’s governmental actions (none of which, after some dexterous sleight of hand and misdirection, stopped it from instigating the above actions).
We believe caffeine and alcohol raise plenty of important public policy issues, whether they are combined or not, and they warrant serious deliberation. But many of the deliberations so far reflect political pressures more than an even-handed review.
November 18, 2010 Update: TTB lands another blow, against caffeine added to alcohol beverages, here.
Related Posts:
Tags:
caffeine/secondary effects, fda, legally interesting/controversial, media buzz, policy
Posted in:
Email This Post
| 
Print This Post
|
So Many Warnings
If you like your warnings big and graphic, you will love the alcohol beverage warnings under consideration in Thailand. The Wall Street Journal of September 17, 2010 shows the photo above, as an example of one of the warnings under consideration.
If you think it can’t happen here, take a look at this tobacco website which explains: “New legislation passed in June 2009 requires pictorial health warnings on 50% of the front and back of US cigarette packages within 24 months, in addition to a 15 month implementation window.” At least 13 countries already require graphical warnings to cover more than 50% of the cigarette pack. At least 38 countries have finalized requirements for picture warnings. The Wall Street Journal article explains:
Alcohol companies world-wide are lining up to fight a Thai plan to require graphic warning labels about alcohol on the country’s domestic and imported beer, wine and liquor bottles.
The proposed labels—which would cover 30% of the bottles’ surface area—include unusually explicit warnings about risks associated with alcohol use. One picture shows a shirtless man grasping a woman by the hair and raising his fist to hit her, accompanied by the words, “Alcohol consumption could harm yourself, children and family.”
The labels “are the most extreme we’ve ever seen,” says Brett Bivans, vice president of the International Center for Alcohol Policies, a Washington-based not-for-profit group funded by alcohol companies.
In the meantime, liquor companies worry that Thailand is about to set a dangerous precedent that other larger countries could follow. With only 65 million people, the Southeast Asian nation will never be one of the world’s biggest alcohol importers. But in 2005, it was among the first to slap graphic warning labels on cigarette packaging, such as pictures of diseased lungs. Since then, the U.K., Malaysia and other countries have followed suit.
The stakes are high enough that the U.S. government agreed to pay for a group of Thai officials to travel to Washington to meet with U.S. alcohol experts to learn about alternatives to graphic warning labels, people familiar with the plan say.
Health advocates and industry leaders have long argued about the effectiveness of warning labels on consumer products. Critics maintain that graphic labels lose their sting once consumers grow accustomed to them.
Related Posts:
Tags:
Posted in:
Email This Post
| Print This Post
|
The Beef is Here (Meaty Booze 5)
Boston Beer has finally answered the big question eluding so many since the 1980s — “where’s the beef?” It’s right here, in the beer bottle. Burke in the Bottle is “Ale Brewed with Beef and Spices with Molasses Added.”
Throw in a side of broccoli and we are all set for the evening. If this guy and Sam Adams think it’s worth drinking, who are we to cast aspersions?
For Meaty Booze aficionados, here is Meaty Booze 1 (worms), 2 (scorpion), 3 (chicken), and 4 (bugs).
Related Posts:
Tags:
ingredients, unlikely combinations, would you drink it?
Posted in:
Email This Post
| Print This Post
|
(Lots More) Nutrition Information Coming Soon
TTB had a fascinating tidbit in the September 3, 2010 TTB Newsletter. It tends to say that nutrition information will be attaching to beer, wine and spirits a lot sooner than most people expected. Not so much on labels (yet), but on menus, wine lists and similar postings at on-premise retailers. This seems like a huge and important development, courtesy of President Obama, Congress and FDA (rather than TTB). It therefore seems odd that there is not much outcry; the submitted comments do not show much awareness from the alcohol beverage industry. The Washington Post suggests that the connection among the health care legislation, menu labeling and alcohol beverages caught most people by surprise.
TTB summarized the initiative succinctly:
On March 23, 2010, the President signed the health care reform legislation into law. Section 4205 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 requires restaurants and similar retail food establishments with 20 or more locations to list calorie content information for standard menu items on restaurant menus and menu boards, including drive-through menu boards. Other nutrient information – total calories, fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sodium, total carbohydrates, sugars, fiber and total protein – would have to be made available in writing upon request.
The FDA Questions and Answers in B, Covered Food, Question 2, provides: “Are meat and poultry dishes and alcoholic beverages that are served in a covered restaurant or SRFE subject to the requirements in section 4205? Yes. Meat and poultry dishes and alcoholic beverages are considered food as defined in the FFDCA (see Question B.1). Therefore, the nutrition disclosure requirements in section 4205 apply in cases where these foods are listed on a menu or menu board or are otherwise covered under section 4205, even though they may be regulated by other agencies in other circumstances.”
The FDA is required by law to issue proposed regulations to carry out these provisions by March 23, 2011.
The FDA notice is here. FDA’s Guidance explains that alcohol beverages are covered every bit as much as a McMuffin. The Womble Carlyle law firm explains that this initiative is on a very fast track, with some elements (such as calorie disclosure) already binding as of enactment of the law six months ago, well before the regulations get written or finalized. It’s a good time to be in the calorie measurement business.
Related Posts:
Tags:
fda, policy, serving facts/allergens
Posted in:
Email This Post
| Print This Post
|
Kombucha Buzz Draws TTB Scrutiny
Mention the words “kombucha” and “buzz” in 2006 and you’d likely be referring to the drink’s growing popularity. But mention those same words today and you’d likely be talking about allegations the fermented tea drink contains a small but legally significant amount of alcohol.
As a recent TTB statement illustrates, the Bureau is working with FDA to ensure that kombucha sold as a non-alcoholic beverage—currently all kombucha—contains less than 0.5% alcohol. Some reports claim kombucha contains up to 3% alcohol. From the TTB release:
Kombucha is a fermented tea that is typically marketed as a non-alcoholic beverage, which means that it may contain a trace amount of alcohol, as long as the overall alcohol content is less than 0.5 percent alcohol by volume. In some cases these products have alcohol contents that significantly exceed 0.5 percent. At this point, TTB does not know how many brands might be affected by this issue.
[...]
TTB plans to take samples of kombucha products from the marketplace and test their alcohol content in order to determine if the products are labeled in compliance with Federal law. If TTB finds alcohol beverages that are not labeled in accordance with Federal law, we will take appropriate steps to bring them into compliance.
TTB’s kombucha inquiry received some added exposure after Whole Foods pulled the drink from its shelves at the suggestion of TTB and amid news reports suggesting troubled actress Lindsay Lohan’s consumption of the drink may have been responsible for setting off her court-ordered alcohol-monitoring ankle bracelet. Lohan, for her part, recently began serving a 90-day jail sentence a judge imposed on the actress earlier this summer as punishment for skipping mandatory alcohol-education courses.
Related Posts:
Tags:
legally interesting/controversial, media buzz, policy
Posted in:
Email This Post
| Print This Post
|
