As I mentioned, under the Dietary Supplements Act, a company has to disclose all adverse events they know of. The Food and Beverage Act is classified under food, and it has stricter FDA regulations but you don’t have to report adverse events to the FDA. Further, by classifying themselves as a beverage, consumers can buy Monster with food stamps and possibly in some circumstances be exempt from sales tax. Red Bull has been classified as a beverage for a long time so I think that Monster is making this move in order to gain market share. Only Monster Beverage Corporation knows why the change was made. But as a result of the change, the FDA will not be made aware of all of the future adverse events that possibly associate Monster Energy Drinks with illnesses, heart attacks and deaths.
LAS: Once Monster Energy Drink is categorized as a beverage, won’t the company have to be more transparent with its labeling - particularly how much caffeine a 24-oz drink contains?
KG: Yes. Monster has always included the fact that its drinks contain caffeine as part of its proprietary “energy blend.” The problem is that Monster has not always disclosed the amount of caffeine in its drinks. That has been a big mystery. Now that Monster is choosing to categorize itself as a “food” instead of as a “dietary supplement,” it will be required to disclose on its can the amount of caffeine from all sources (including guarana).
Last December Consumer Reports studied 27 popular brands of energy drinks. The investigators found that, out of those 27 drinks, 11 didn’t even include the amount of caffeine on the label. The remaining 16 products did specify the amount of caffeine, but five out of the 16 products contained about 20 percent more caffeine than listed on the label.
LAS: According to Consumer Reports, when Monster Beverage officials were asked to comment on why they don’t list the amount of caffeine on their product label, a Monster spokesperson said, “There is no legal or commercial business requirement to do so, and also because our products are completely safe, and the actual numbers are not meaningful to most consumers.”
KG: First of all, for Monster to say that its products are completely safe is very troubling, considering the mounting scientific evidence that such drinks are unsafe - especially for children and individuals with underlying heart conditions. This evidence includes the fact that The American Academy of Pediatrics has issued a clinical statement advising all pediatricians that children should not consume energy drinks. A recent report from The American Heart Association indicates that energy drinks can raise blood pressure and alter the heart’s rhythm. In March 2013, eighteen well-known medical doctors and scientists wrote a letter to the FDA urging the agency to take immediate steps to protect children and adolescents from the dangers of energy drinks. They have also suggested a link between energy drink consumption and increased blood pressure, and changes in the heart’s QT rhythm.
As I said, the Energy Drink World is like the Wild West, and this particular quote from Monster Beverage is indicative of the problem - The Rooster is guarding the Hen House. As I said, a company like Monster, Rockstar or Red Bull can choose to classify itself as a dietary supplement or as a traditional food/beverage. The energy drink companies can also change their classification when it thinks it will benefit its bottom line. Monster’s recent change from being a dietary supplement to a traditional “beverage” is a perfect example. Just as the regulatory environment for Monster as a “dietary supplement” was heating up, and their adverse event reports were receiving a lot of scrutiny, Monster decided that it would change its classification.
It seems that the decision to change was made shortly after the press became aware of the adverse event reports linked to Monster. Therefore, I think it is likely that Monster decided that it made more economic sense to change its classification, to go ahead and disclose the