Jump to content

Starbucks must put cancer warning on California coffee: judge


webfact

Recommended Posts

Starbucks must put cancer warning on California coffee: judge

 

2018-03-29T224422Z_1_LYNXMPEE2S22F_RTROPTP_3_USA-STARBUCKS.JPG

FILE PHOTO: A barista makes drinks inside a newly designed Starbucks coffee shop in Fountain Valley, California August 22, 2013. REUTERS/Mike Blake

 

(Reuters) - Starbucks Corp and other coffee companies must put a cancer warning label on coffee products sold in California, a Los Angeles judge ruled.

 

Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle said in a proposed decision Wednesday that Starbucks and other companies had failed to show that the threat from a chemical compound produced when roasting coffee was insignificant, court documents showed.

 

Starbucks and other plaintiffs in the case have until April 10 to file objections.

 

Officials from Starbucks Corp <SBUX.O>, McDonald’s Corp <MCD.N>, Dunkin’ Donuts <DNKN.O> and Peet’s did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

 

The California-based Council for Education and Research on Toxics sued Starbucks and other companies on grounds they failed to provide warnings to consumers that the coffee they sold contained high levels of acrylamide, a toxic and carcinogenic chemical, court documents showed.

 

(Reporting by Nate Raymond; additional reporting by Lisa Baertlein; Editing by G Crosse and Tom Brown)

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-03-30
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, webfact said:

they failed to provide warnings to consumers that the coffee they sold contained high levels of acrylamide, a toxic and carcinogenic chemical, court documents showed.

i bet in future generations, people will be amazed we poisoned ourselves so badly

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How to put a sighn in the air that indicates that the air we breathe in big cities is cancerous.
A message from a disfunctional country, supported by disfunctional families, disfunctional courts and a disfunctional governement. Expected to defend the values of a disfunctional world.
The future looks bright.
Cheers.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Perhaps all food and drink should be labelled? Just in case. :violin:

Do they make all cars for sale carry a warning sign that travelling in one may cause death or injury?

Perhaps they should have a sign in maternity wards that being born is to expose oneself to death.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, webfact said:

Starbucks Corp <SBUX.O>, McDonald’s Corp <MCD.N>, Dunkin’ Donuts <DNKN.O> and Peet’s

All companies that really care about their customers health and would never serve unhealthy items to the public.

Disgusting knobheads frequently seen at all of these garbage troughs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, PatOngo said:

Only Starbucks? All American fast food should come with a warning including that black colored sugar drink in the red and white can that is so popular!

If you read the article, there were about 5 crap serving conglomerate chains mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Steps said:

Next on the list:

  1. Added Sugar related products
  2. Alcoholic beverages, particularly chemical beer

Yes because those lung cancer photos and warnings seem to really curb smokers from buying them at 7-11.

Surely more printing in a label will keep unhealthy humans from continuing poor life choices.

Nice job again California legislation, give yourself a raise next fiscal year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Stop eating and drinking and it is likely you will not get cancer.

 

Too easy, what's the problem? :smile:

I'm not too sure that this is anykind of solution Ivr181. In mythology Narcissus adopted this approach you see - with disasterous effects I seem to recall

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HLover said:

Yes because those lung cancer photos and warnings seem to really curb smokers from buying them at 7-11.

Surely more printing in a label will keep unhealthy humans from continuing poor life choices.

Nice job again California legislation, give yourself a raise next fiscal year.

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/tables/trends/cig_smoking/

image.png.997908d4a82fa7f2f7490d8387c5057e.png

 

Result of a culmination in combined approach to smoking cessation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Steps said:

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/tables/trends/cig_smoking/

image.png.997908d4a82fa7f2f7490d8387c5057e.png

 

Result of a culmination in combined approach to smoking cessation

Suppose getting the Hollywood influential movie makers to stop smoking in movies and the music industry to stop glamorizing marijuana would be too much to ask.

Funny how these sheeple really think the USDA and others 'care'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, HLover said:

Yes because those lung cancer photos and warnings seem to really curb smokers from buying them at 7-11.

Surely more printing in a label will keep unhealthy humans from continuing poor life choices.

Nice job again California legislation, give yourself a raise next fiscal year.

It's important to inform consumers, just ask Phillip Morris!!

 

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92675&page=1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.









×
×
  • Create New...