The Californian nanny state is looking to finally address consumption of the nation’s most consumed drug, coffee.
Who else was aware that we were in the middle of a caffeine crisis? Not I. What could possibly be causing the state to crack down on the beverage responsible for zeros of deaths each and every year? A minuscule cancer risk nobody before thought to draw attention to, for the same reason we don’t warn people about the risk of being struck by lighting while strolling down the street.
Not in California, though, where a judge is going to rule on whether or not a 1986 state law meant to warn consumers of potential harm applies to coffee.
According to the Wall Street Journal,
Under a state law, cancer warnings already follow Californians when they enter the lobby of apartment buildings, drive into parking garages and sit down at restaurants. They also pop up on products including kitty litter, ceramic plates and black licorice.
Coffee is on the hot seat because of the presence of acrylamide, a flavorless chemical produced during the roasting process.
Acrylamide is one of more than 900 chemicals on a list of those known to the state of California to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm. Businesses must warn about the presence of any of the chemicals under the law, known as Proposition 65.
The chemical, used for industrial processes like making paper and dyes, is also created during the cooking process for many baked and fried foods, including potato chips, bread and french fries.
So the real culprit here is acrylamide, and coffee is just the beginning. Next, regulators will require all products including the ingredient to carry a cancer warning.
What regulators fail to ask is what a dangerous amount of acrylamide is, and according to the American Cancer Society, that’s more than any human would actually ever consume: “Acrylamide has been found to increase the risk of several types of cancer when given to lab animals (rats and mice) in their drinking water. The doses of acrylamide given in these studies have been as much as 1,000 to 10,000 times higher than the levels people might be exposed to in foods.”
So be careful before you pick up that ten-thousandth potato chip, I guess.
https://twitter.com/neontaster/status/956539733957599234
To repeat the Journal’s pun, this case has been brewing since 2010, and was started by the Southern California-based nonprofit Council for Education and Research on Toxics. With the assistance of their attorney Raphael Metzger, they’ve sued dozens of coffee sellers and manufacturers. Among the defendants are Starbucks and Keurig Green Mountain.
There isn’t a single study linking coffee specifically to cancer, and some even show the drink to be good for you in moderation.
What do you think is more likely here: This obscure advocacy group thinks coffee is a silent killer, or they want a handsome lawsuit payout?
Share this wacky news with others now!
