Family files lawsuit against Panera Bread after college student who drank ‘charged lemonade’ dies

I hope this lawsuit forces them to remove this. I'm sorry this young girl died. This isn't the first issue they had with this drink. My husband and I were discussing it months ago. He thought it was just lemonade - sugar, water, lemons. We didn't figure out why he was up all night. Later someone old him how much caffeine it has. We had no idea. It's dangerous to those with high bp.

I'm not going to lie when I first read the headline I thought this was probably a frivolous lawsuit but after reading the article I thought that stuff should get pulled.
- It's like that McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit. Poor lady was made a mockery of for ordering hot coffee because it sounds ridiculous at first but she had 2nd degree burns. It was recklessly hot, as was this drink recklessly produced and marketed.
- Do a bit of research into the marketing actually used for this drink. Assuming the store uses the standard Panera marketing, there's a big sign on the dispenser saying how much caffeine is in it. It's a tragic mistake, but unless that location uniquely screwed up, that's all it is.
- I don't think they're legally liable after what I've read through and personally experienced -- but I absolutely don't think this is a frivolous lawsuit. It's still worth merit when it comes to signage and frankly medical testing.
  The biggest problem is that she drank it without knowing the heart condition. We need to have better detection and screening to make sure people know this.
I don't mind it existing as a product. If it does though it should be very clearly labeled with warnings that are impossible to miss. This seems great for Panaras on college campuses, but there should be no possibility you confuse it for something else.
- More caffeine than two energy drinks combined seems very excessive to me.
Yeah, I also wasn’t aware. I imagine there were signs, but who looks for the caffeine content of lemonade? In my case I just had a dash t flavor soda, so I didn’t notice until my kid pointed it out
Similarly, when my kids were little, I kept them away from stimulants, but who expects to have to prohibit lemonade for the caffeine hit?
Why didn't you read the very clear, explicit label?
- What very clear, explicit label?
  The Charged Lemonade was “offered side-by-side with all of Panera’s non-caffeinated and/or less caffeinated drinks” and was advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage that contained as much caffeine as the restaurant’s dark roast coffee, according to photos of both the menu and beverage dispensers in the store, which were included in the wrongful death lawsuit.
Sorry but no. If we just arbitrarily remove products because someone managed to die because of it... We literally won't have anything.
- Let’s not use the term arbitrary arbitrarily. It just makes people stupid.

8 months ago Food Theroy did agreat video on this. It's very appropriately titled given the unfortunate circumstances. To say this drink was caffeineted is a major understatement, it was basically four and a half monsters in one cup.

Franky, it was reckless for Panera to make and sell this drink and they absolutely earned this lawsuit. There was pently of forewarning that the abnormally high caffeine content in this was dangerous for certain groups. Hope the family wins big, nothing will bring back their loved one but this could've been avoided with more clear nutrientional warnings.

f u panera

Why is quadruple Monster even on the menu of a restaurant that is mostly famous for soup?
- Because they feel the need to pivot and try to extract more money and bring in other types of people by offering more options for everything. To bad it's all garbage, and very overpriced.
  Maybe I am wrong, but there is no way this place can sustain itself with the prices they charge and the drop in quality they now offer compared to early 2000's.
- It was probably invented by and for BOH staff
- It's effectively the largest size of a coffee, which is comparable to what coffee shops sell.
The other thing is, these drinks are in the same dispensers, the same location, that used to have regular juices. Even assuming the signs were there, it’s set up for no one to pay attention
- Also it's mixed on-site by employees, so consistency of caffeine between batches occasions is at risk.
At 390 mg, it's more like 2½ Monsters. For some people (me) that's just Tuesday
So are you saying "f u" to all coffee shops? Because I can (and often do) get a standard on-menu beverage with more caffeine than these larges without a single warning on it at Dunkin Donuts.
These lemonades are at least covered in "this has THIS much caffeine in it" advertising.
I don't understand how it's reckless to serve something that 99.99% of the population will never have any significant health problem with, even if they drank double or triple the amount this girl did.
Good lord. I drank like half a red bull once and felt like I was going to die... Why would anyone even want to consume that much...
- I had a drop of redbull once and was raging for months. It’s strong stuff

All caffinated beverages should be required to disclose their caffeine content on the packaging.

You mean like how Panera Bread does?
https://media-cldnry.s-nbcnews.com/image/upload/t_fit-560w,f_auto,q_auto:eco,dpr_2.0/rockcms/2023-10/231017-panera-bread-charged-lemonade-al-1019-f1a04a.jpg
The Charged Lemonade was “offered side-by-side with all of Panera’s non-caffeinated and/or less caffeinated drinks” and was advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage that contained as much caffeine as the restaurant’s dark roast coffee, according to photos of both the menu and beverage dispensers in the store, which were included in the wrongful death lawsuit. https://www.panerabread.com/en-us/app/product/57f9b1aa54df4bd2c2eacca55efa1c96.html
Not to disagree with you, you're right, but I think they should also indicate how much is normal consumption. It's quite surprising this isn't something that's required on the nutritional label.
- they should also indicate how much is normal consumption
  For real, this is the actual problem. How much does 390 mg of caffeine even mean to the average person? For reference, one of those 20 oz drinks are almost equivalent to 3 cups of regular black coffee.
- I’m kind of confused by the “it should be labeled!” comments as to me, that is decently labeled. The descriptions say “coffee” and “guarana” for each one, and listing the amounts of caffeine is more information than you get for other drinks. It’s not too much to think that the customer (especially someone with a life threatening condition) would read the descriptions.
- I have never been to a Panera, are drinks self serve?
In this case, there is a large sign on the dispenser that includes caffeine content in mg, as well as comparing it to their dark-roast coffee.
Agreed. Some of us are careful about how much caffeine we ingest because we want it to work when we use it, and/or because we get real twitchy when overcaffeinated.

Welp, this post might have just saved my life. I had no idea, and a heart condition.

Yeah, this is really serious. I hope people don't construe this to be an absurd example of over litigation, while it is a completely reasonable case. Kind of like the McDonald's coffee lady getting clowned on when she is a genuine victim.
- We don't know if it's a completely reasonable case, yet. A few statements in the article would clearly cross the line of honest journalism if they weren't quotations (IMO they still do). Specifically, I think quoting 3 words of their "has lots of caffeine" descriptive sign out-of-context was incredibly dishonest. Might as well comment that a "Do Not Enter" sign reads "Enter". I mean it TECHNICALLY does, but let's give the reader the full story and let us decide, and the "Do not" is important. Just like the second half of "Plant-based and Clean with as much caffeine as our Dark Roast coffee" is more contextually important than merely "Plant-based and clean".
  Is it possible the signs were smudged, missing, facing the wrong direction, or too small? Yeah, sure. But that's not what the article is representing as the truth. Some of the quotes comparing the lemonade with the lower-caffeine "dark coffee" even seem nonsensical because the article is hiding the full context of the above quote, that the lemonade is advertised as "as much caffeine as our dark coffee".
- That's because clickbait was a thing even before you clicked to get news.
That's insane.

Reporting in after having just come from Panera due to this article. Didn't read article, and it might be click bait or might not. I do know that the drink in question is slapped right beside all the typical juices and sodas, and the label says "contains as much as our dark roast coffee" then below that, even less obvious it gives serving sizes & caffeine amounts. Call me crazy, but I doubt your average consumer is going to consider just how much caffeine might be in LEMONADE.

Panera is definitely losing this one. It could even be argued that they chose a product with that much caffeine and to not really advertise it based on the amounts of caffeine of the 30oz literally being a hair's width away from the potential danger threshold.

- You can't believe that people would want heroic doses of sugar and caffeine, two of the most available addictive substances on the market?
  Also a lot of people don't like the taste of coffee or tea
- I'm basically the target audience for this and I'd never heard of it
  Agreed that it is a very weird product to just kinda... have
- There’s still a large number of us wondering wtf the market for Red Bull is. I want a drink with the flavor and consistency of watered down Stretch Armstrong guts with more caffeine than anything that has ever existed. It seems like such a weird product in general.
- Who is like: I really want a lemonade but I want it to have more caffeine than a redbull!
  It doesn't have more caffeine than a red bull per unit volume. But yes, if you compare the largest size to one can of red bull it will win out. So will drinking a similar volume of coffee.
  And I'd guess the market for it is people who want coffee levels of caffeine but don't like the taste of coffee or the citrus battery acid taste of energy drinks.
The 30oz size has 390mg caffeine. The FDA says 400mg a day is not generally associated with harmful effects for adults without heart conditions etc. If the FDA says up to 400mg is fine, I don't think it's fair to call that the "danger threshold." That's like calling the speed limit the "danger threshold." It's set there for a reason, but you don't go from "no adverse effects" to "danger" as soon as you cross the line.
It's advertised as having the same amount of caffeine as their coffee. 30oz of coffee is a pretty significant amount. Not typically dangerous, but hardly something you can drink by accident.
- 390 in a serving versus 400 per day.
  That's an entire days worth in one blast.
It's sad that someone loss their life to - of all things - lemonade.
If you sell a 30oz container, you should have to label the amount of shit that is in that container instead of making up your own, cockamamie "serving size" that does not relate to real-world situations whatsoever.
I don't think they will lose. It clearly states charged lemonade which most people will understand means caffinated. Even if you don't know that means caffinated it has lettering that is more than large enough that states it has caffeine as well as the amount. It is so apparent that this is caffinated and just as apparent how much it is. It sucks this lady died but either she is also blind as a bat or she decided to gamble and drink it.
- The warning has to be reasonable for its purpose. Intended and likely to reach the consumer, and to be understood. It's meant to fairly apprise consumers of the material risks.
  There is nothing resembling a warning. That's fine if it's just regular lemonade. It seems to me to be positioned as basically regular lemonade and otherwise indistinguishable except for "charged," "# mg caffiene," and "natural ingredients."
  This information seems inadequate based on the seriousness and likelihood of the material risk. The girl's condition is apparently pretty common, the seriousness of the danger is deathly, and the likelihood that consumers in the girl's position are as likely as not to understand the danger. More is required.
  The average consumer does not know about dosages of caffeine in milligrams, and possible side effects. The labeling seems hardly likely to inform a consumer that one glass of lemonade they are about to drink is the equivalent of drinking three cups of coffee. Who the fuck puts caffiene into lemonade? Is it even lemonade?
  Edit: speech to text has gotten worse lately. Also, I have to wonder whether anyone asked for this product? I wonder what the focus groups said. Did they even do them? The more I think of this the worse the idea seems.

I drank a monster energy once (well, to be precise, about half of one.),back when energy drinks were still relatively new and there wasnt as much common knowledge about them as there is today.

Just that half of a can was enough to make me feel like I was going to die.

My resting heart rate was over 150bpm, was shaking with tremors, and cold sweating. I genuinely thought I was gonna die.

And I have never so much as touched another one, and will never touch another one, for the rest of my life.

They are incredibly dangerous and shouldnt be something any kid or idiot can walk into a store and buy with couple bucks.

and I have absolutely no idea how there are people that exist out there that can drink 6-10 of them a day without spontaneously combusting from tremor induced cellular friction.

They are not incredibly dangerous, not be a long shot.
They can be dangerous to a very small subset of people with preexisting conditions and that's about it.
- The trouble is quite a lot of people have the pre-existing condition of being brainless. So they mainline 5 cans in a row, if you do that with Coke nothing happens, if you do that with Monster even a healthy person is going to have heart problems.
  Also some prat had a great idea of mixing it with Yeager. Thus mixing two of the most disgusting liquids in the world together. But more importantly mixing a stimulant and a suppressant, which again can have serious health risks even for otherwise healthy individuals.
  We don't sell glue to children even though most of them probably won't sniff it. So why do we tolerate energy drinks for them? The lasting kids need is to be even more hyper.
- "They are not incredibly dangerous, except for when they are incredibly dangerous"
There often more caffeine in a standard coffee than half a litre of monster energy drink.
I'm guessing that every person is different when it comes to energy drink tolerance, or there might be some underlying conditions. Back when I used to drink energy drinks, I wouldn't really feel anything except for maybe feeling a bit more "energetic" but I'm not sure how much of that is placebo. Granted, I wouldn't drink 6-10 cans a day because I don't think they taste that good, and would only drink a can occasionally.
- Yeah, it seems for every person like the above with, I assume, a sensitivity to caffeine, there's my friend from high school that pounded 3 BFC Monsters (32 oz each) and went to the next class like nothing happened.
- I had one can because we're really overworked at work and I felt terrible and ended up being really useless. And this was when I was in my 30s so I wasn't exactly some small kid
  I have no issue with coffee so it's not caffeine that's the problem, it's something else that's in the drinks. I even have had caffeine pills and not had that reaction.
250ml: caffeine
Energy drinks: 80mg
Coffee: 100mg (80-120)
Cola: 25mg
Black tea: 12-20mg
- Wait coffee has more caffeine then energy drinks?
- Those numbers are off.
  Energy drink: 80-300mg
  Coffee: 80-120mg this was accurate
  Cola/other soda: 25-55mg
  Black tea: 40-60mg
Half a monster is 43mg caffeine. About as much as a Pepsi, or less than 3oz of Dunkin Donuts coffee (a small is 180mg at 10oz). I'm not at all saying you're lying about your experience, but what you are describing is an extreme caffeine sensitivity (or a reaction to something else).
I don't drink energy drinks anymore but to answer your question you build up tolerance.
I have absolutely no idea how there are people that exist out there that can drink 6-10 of them a day without spontaneously combusting from tremor induced cellular friction.
A few years ago my doctor put me on beta blockers to try and manage my migraines. My blood pressure was always within healthy limits, usually around 110/70, on the beta blockers it dropped a little bit, but nothing drastic. My heart rate on the other hand?
Resting, it was 41-45 bmp, sitting and fidgeting it was 54-58bpm, and walking around it was 65-73. I'd have to really push hard at the gym to get it to 100 and it would drop back down so suddenly when I stopped I'd often get blue lips when doing cool down stretches.
My fingers and toes were always blue, I had chilblains in the middle of the summer.
When I asked my doctor if I should try Alpha Blockers because they don't effect your heart he said "just drink a can of redbull 3-4 times a day"
So that's what I did.
It wasn't until I changed doctors and she asked me about my tea and coffee habits that it fully dawned on me just how much caffeine I was having.
I completely forgot tea has caffeine, I'd have 5-8 cups a day, plus 3 no-doze pills, 2 red bulls and a ristretto on most work days. On weekends I'd have 3-4 teas, 2-3 red bulls, 2 coffees and a caffeine based pre-workout.
My resting heart rate during all this was about 58bpm....and I slept like a log.
Anyway, my new doctor was horrified and I'm on alpha blockers now. Still no migraines, I've had to cut out everything caffeinated except 3 cups of tea a day, my resting heart rate is 67bpm....but now I have orthostatic hypotension which kinda sucks. Not as bad as taking trucker crack just so my he would remember to beat. I also struggle with intermittent bouts of insomnia now, which is weird.
- I, too am horrified that an actual doctor with a doctorate in medicine would suggest that a patient pound multiple energy drinks instead of I dunno, using medicine that you even suggested.
My boss drinks like 8 energy drinks a day. Idk how he isn't dead.
- Maybe he is, but he just hasn't come down from the high yet.
- Same, caffeine content aside it's like 100 grams in sugar every day from energy drinks. Gross
I used to chug multiple of those on the way home from school and didn't feel a thing. I think we lose much resilience with age.
- I am not, and was not, sensitive to caffeine in any way.
  Hell, that can be proven just by the embarrassingly large amount of Mountain Dew I drank a day during that era of my life, which had absolutely zero effect on me.

Just looking at the photo in the article, it looks clear to me how much caffeine is in it:

Unclear if that's a "before" or "after" photo though.

If I saw that, I wouldn't really have any idea how much 260mg of caffeine is, compared to your average espresso shot. IMHO there probably should be some kind of upper limit to the amount of caffeine you can put in a drink (or at least be forced to call it something other than 'lemonade').
- Yeah I doubt most coffee/tea/soda drinkers could tell you how much caffeine is in their drinks. 260mg means nothing to me without a baseline
- ...which is why the sign also says it's as much caffeine as coffee.
- Help me understand how much 260mg of caffeine is by comparing it to standard caffinated drinks
  Searching for: caffeine content of common drinks
  Generating answers for you…
  Sure, I can help you with that. According to the Mayo Clinic1, the caffeine content of common drinks can vary depending on the type, brand, and brewing method. Here are some examples of how much caffeine is in different drinks, based on the average values from various sources2345:
  A 12-ounce (355 mL) can of cola has about 34-44 mg of caffeine. A 12-ounce (355 mL) can of energy drink has about 71.9 mg of caffeine. An 8-ounce (237 mL) cup of brewed black coffee has about 80-150 mg of caffeine. An 8-ounce (237 mL) cup of brewed green tea has about 30 mg of caffeine. A 2-ounce (60 mL) shot of energy shot has about 215 mg of caffeine. So, if you consume 260 mg of caffeine, that is equivalent to:
  About 6 to 8 cans of cola About 3 to 4 cans of energy drink About 2 to 3 cups of brewed black coffee About 9 to 10 cups of brewed green tea About one shot of energy shot I hope this helps you understand how much caffeine is in different drinks. Remember, the FDA recommends no more than 400 mg of caffeine per day for most adults. Too much caffeine can cause side effects such as insomnia, anxiety, and high blood pressure. So, drink responsibly and enjoy your caffeinated beverages in moderation. 😊
Do they have that information on the drive through or the app though?
- That's a super good question, it's not clear, but it's also not clear if that's how she bought the drink.
- Edit: Yes, it's visible. No, I don't think it's a good idea. Fuck corporate Panera, sue away. If it hurts our wages we'll just protest corporate.
How visible is that sign from the order counter? Also, visually handicapped customers would have no idea.
- It's self serve, unless it was a drive through pickup order.
To be fair, the average person is probably not going to really know how much caffeine is a lot of caffeine if you just give them the number, and the fact that people usually drink higher volumes of lemonade than dark coffee might lead to confusion as well. Plus, people don't generally expect caffeine in lemonade, so it's easy to imagine someone just going for the big flavor label and just figuring the smaller stuff is just nutrition labels and ignoring it.
I'm not really sure the best way to label this, it doesn't seem like a great product idea at all tbh, but given the combination of potentially dangerous amounts of caffeine and it being a product one wouldn't normally expect to contain any, I'd think that the labelling should be set up in a way as to be impossible to make assumptions about or ignore. Like, make it as big as the flavor label, in a box of a different color usually used for warnings like red or bright orange or something, and mention that the quantity of caffeine involved can be dangerous to those sensitive in addition to just the number.
- I mean, the label already says "has as much caffeine as coffee". Short of only selling caffeine at a dispensary with giant warnings, I'm not sure there's any action that could or should be taken.
- As a caffeine fiend and energy drink afficianado, holy fucking shit that an obnoxious amount of caffeine in a fountain drink imo
  I'm with you, this needs to be sold individually in cans not free pourable.
- If you have a heart condition or generally just a high sensitivity to caffeine, it's pretty important to know how much is a lot. The vast majority of people do not have any serious issues consuming 300mg or so of caffeine, so putting a bunch of big scary labels on this stuff just seems like overkill. For example, if you have a peanut allergy, it's generally on you to check the allergen list in the fine print, or if you have Celiac disease, you need to either buy stuff specifically labeled gluten-free or confirm with a restaurant, manufacturer, etc.
  The fact that all of their signs have not just one, but three separate indicators ("charged", as much caffeine as coffee, and the specific caffeine amount) for anyone who might have a sensitivity is enough to show Panera's due diligence in my opinion.
  I do get your point that people wouldn't automatically assume there's caffeine in Panera's random juice drinks, but caffeine is absolutely everywhere right now. I'd personally love for caffeine to be required to be listed in the nutrition label of drinks (or food that contains it) so you would know how much is in a Mountain Dew or Coke. But until that happens, I don't see how Panera could be seen as liable in this situation.
- 400mg of caffeine is not potentially dangerous unless you're one of the unlucky few people who have a heart condition. Even then, people with heart conditions aren't necessarily dropping dead because they drank some caffeine.
That's how it was signed every time I've been into a Panera. They've been catering to the study crowd (and remote workers) for a while now. Before the pandemic, it was common to see the Panera bread near the college full til closing with people having coffee and using the wifi.
Saying they didn't know it was cafinated feels like a failing on their part. The "charged" part of the name made me assume it at first sight , myself.
America is a place of personal feeedom but not personal accountability it seems.
Needs to be bigger and brighter imo. It looks like standard nutrition info which I omits never look at.

That's insane. I hope not only that they win the lawsuit, but that companies understand stimulants can be harder (even dangerous) on some people.

The way caffeine affects me does not risk my life, but it can get ugly as I have a mental health condition that gets triggered by stimulants. It is so common to rely on caffeine nowadays, and it's present in many beverages and snacks. People forget it is still a drug.

There should be labels and there should be less of a presence of caffeine (and other legal drugs) in unrelated products. I mean, it's normal if coffee has caffeine, it shouldn't be normal that a lemonade has caffeine.

There should be labels and there should be less of a presence of caffeine (and other legal drugs) in unrelated products. I mean, it's normal if coffee has caffeine, it shouldn't be normal that a lemonade has caffeine.
I disagree. Don't get me wrong - fuck Panera in general, but I'm all for more products being offered so long as they're properly labeled which this was. Also with a name like charged lemonade it heavily omplies it's not normal lemonade. There's an argument to be made here about personal responsibilities and reading labels.
- Charged lemonadw to me would indicate extra sweet not cat piss gaurana.
- Yeah it's a tragic story, but I don't think Panera is at fault here. What I would like for them to do is update their signage to be even more specific as a result of this. There's no legal requirement to, and I don't think a court will find them liable, but no matter how you spin it, this was an absolute tragedy for the girl and her family. Caffeine overdose is an incredibly unpleasant feeling when you drink one more coffee than you should. The poor girl. It would be kind of Panera to make changes because of it.
The beverage contains 390mg, which is equivalent to 6.5 cups of coffee. I hope this will be used as a case study for other businesses on how to properly label your drinks and further increase transparancy about ingredients used in beverages.
- A typical drip coffee contains roughly 100mg of caffeine per 8 oz cup, which means a 30 oz cup of coffee would contain very similar amounts to one of the charged lemonades in question. Or course, caffeine varies wildly in coffee depending on exactly how it's brewed as well as bean origin and roast, so you could easily see well over 400mg in a 30oz drink. And let's not even get started on adding extra shots of espresso.
- 6.5 thimble-sized cups. Compare to an average large coffee (431mg/20oz from Dunkin), or to the average amount consumed by coffee drinkers (~200mg for adults on average, with the 90th percentile being 300-400mg depending on the age group).
- Holy crap, just imagine if they accidentally got the mix ratio on the machine wrong and somebody got a higher concentration of syrup.
  Panera needs to lose this lawsuit and they need to lose it really hard.
No, the responsibility is solely on the consumer. It's clearly labeled as having caffeine. No one is forcing anybody to ingest anything against their will. It's not the company nor governments responsibility to protect oneself against their own stupidity.
- Anything can kill you, but quantity matters. Any reasonable person would assume a product marketed towards them would not have an amount remotely high enough to kill without an explicit warning at the very least.
I'm not trying to blame the woman and agree that it should have been labeled (mostly because of the quantity of caffeine in the drink and less that it was there at all) but if a product is called "Charged Food Item" and you knew you were under doctors orders to avoid certain things wouldn't you ask what was in the item to make it charged?
- Charged could represent electrolytes. Naming schemes can be nonsensical sometimes. What is the "extreme" in extreme burrito? Would that also be caffeine? Or more cheese, a different type of cheese? Some other ingredient? What about chocolate delight? Is delight an ingredient? Is there an ingredient that specifically makes the "delight" part? Sometimes naming schemes are about the process used to create it rather than what is in the food itself; see Triscuit
  Someone with food restrictions absolutely has some due diligence on their plate, but calling out a name to divulge or suggest a specific ingredient (when the ingredients name iself is not used) is a hindsight "obviously that's what it means" take.
  Bugles is another great example where I do not expect instruments in my food. But there is the sweet sweet music of the crunch

Try to cut salt out as much as possible too.
- If reducing caffeine does the trick, you don’t want to also cut out salt pre-emptively. There are dangers to cutting salt and it should be a last resort if nothing else works to reduce blood pressure.
- Is there actually solid science behind that? I had a friend who swore that it really has no effect, and when I personally looked into it, it seemed that a large portion of the population sees higher blood pressure from it, but for most it's a short term increase.
  I think at the end of the day, moderation is what's most important.
- But not too much! Some salt is good, but not the absurd amounts you'll find in prepared food from the food service industry.
  Also, make sure the salt you use has iodine in it. Lots of people don't get that
Just an fyi, coffee typically has as much or more caffeine than energy drinks do. The reason why energy drinks feel like they have a lot of caffeine is because they're typically consumed in greater quantities than coffee (8~12oz for coffee, energy drinks are typically >16oz). So your energy drink has more caffeine because there's more drink, but when it comes to caffeine-per-ounce, they're pretty similar. You're probably getting the same amount of caffeine you were if you only drank those little 8oz red bulls or if you drink 2+ cups of coffee.
- Haven't been to Panera in a while, had no idea they were selling these drinks. The article makes mention that people who have the condition she had are typically OK with caffeine but that energy drinks are more dangerous because they contain other stimulants apart from the caffeine, like taurine. There's really no fair comparison between coffee and energy drinks because of all the other added stimulants in energy drinks
Why? Still caffeine
- One Celsius has 200 mg of caffeine while one espresso drink from home has about 80 mg. Sometimes I still feel tired after drinking my coffee but I definitely feel less jittery and stressed.
- It's like comparing an underground pool to one of those blue shell pools, it's still a pool, it's just ones got waaaaayy more pool in it than the other.
lol

There used to be a product called Redline: White Heat from VPX (same people that make bang with the unhinged CEO). It had to be taken off the market because it had an amphetamine analogue in it called AMP Citrate or DMBA.

One scoop of that stuff made me feel like I was going to die. My friend who took Ritalin at the time told me it was more powerful than any other stimulant he had before.

It’s crazy to think this was openly available at health supplement stores for years before the FDA caught wind.

The supplement industry is rife with problems. A former co-worker of mine used to buy this pre-work out powder on the Internet and he said some batches would be so potent he felt like he was going to jump out of his skin and then sometimes it was really weak and he'd have to take several doses.
- That sounds like some really shoddy manufacturing practices.
amphetamine analogue
citation needed
- Here is the original FDA letter to VPX regarding White Heat. The chemical they are focusing on is 4-Amino-2-Methylpentane Citrate also known as 1,3-Dimethylbutylamine, DMBA, 2-amino-4-methylpentane, AMP citrate, and 4-methyl-2-pentanamine (according to the FDA letter). Upon further research, it seems like, although the structure of the compound is similar to an amphetamine, the actual mechanism of action of these and similar compounds, such as DMAA, still isn’t fully known. So it was a bit inaccurate of me to call it an “amphetamine analogue” since they might not work in a similar manner.
- I don't know about that drink of theirs and have the same doubts as you but here in nl some companies produce ever-changing molecules that are close to the real stuff but different enough that the specific compound isn't banned yet. The one I know of only sells to other European countries.
That product had nothing on the one before it; Clenbutrix. I used to take it all the time you had to squirt it in the back of your throat with the supplied syringe. Daily use would make my throat and tongue sore, and if it hit your tongue well.. good luck with those taste buds lol.
It's crazy they got away with that for as long as they did.
There are two things I would consider: first, it's only relatively recently (i.e. last 100 years) that people cared about this sort of thing. Enforcement and cultural change is slow. Second, a lot of these substances can actually be used as part of a workout routine and weren't developed with abuse in mind. GHB is an example of that--it apparently increased the ability for people to work out, but also will render you unconscious if mixed with alcohol. Until roughly 20 years ago, any GNC just sold it in bottles.

This is so saddening, I can't imagine what her loved ones must be going through. ☹️

Heartbreaking? Did you use a pun?
- No that was coincidental :/

They way I learned Dr. Pepper has caffeine is a friend in high school with a similar undiagnosed condition dying after drinking one.

But it's soda... it's tragic they died but I just can't fathom not assuming every soda is cafinated. There's like a handful of lemon lime sodas that are marketed as uncafinated, and I assume everything else is by default.
- I'm not sure where you live, but most of the sodas available here don't have caffeine unless they're colas. Fruit flavored sodas and root beers are almost never caffeinated, except for Mellow Yellow which I also learned too late that it had caffeine, as I grabbed one late at night and then couldn't sleep.
  It was less tragic than someone dying, but having it be a guessing game whether something has caffeine and how much is dangerous and it needs much clearer labels.
  Of course, we really shouldn't be drinking soda in the first place.
Jeez, that's terrifying.

The 30 oz has 390mg of caffeine! That's four regular cups of coffee. I'm a big guy, and that would mess me up.

And nearly 3/4 cup of sugar. The sugar alone can trigger heart arrythmias. (I have a heart arrythmia and can't tolerate much sugar.)
30 fl oz is A LOT of beverage, a normal sized energy drink is more like 8-16 fl oz, and usually has only 100-200 mg caffeine tops. I've noticed a lot of 300 mg drinks start to get phased out in favor of drinks that only have 120 mg, which is actually a pretty reasonable amount for an adult.
For instance, I'm about 190 lbs and I need close to 250 mg to adequately feel its effects for exercise, and there are studies that show this is an appropriate amount (mg/lb) for exercise benefits.
However, even though 30 fl oz with 390 mg is about in line with the smaller drinks for caffeine/volume, I think ideally they should just not offer such a large size drink.
Wait until you get on energy drinks, then it's like a kick wake up
- Dude energy drinks usually have 150-200mg. Bang, for an extreme example, only has 300mg lol. Obviously it's more concentrated as they're not 30oz, but the point remains.
- I 'd like to, but I had to give up the caffeine. I love the pep it delivers, but if I drink it in any quantity I eventually start getting absolutely debilitating headaches.

Any free market absolutists want to try to explain to me how situations like this should be handled?

Is this poor girl just the first "collateral damage" that allows the market to (eventually) fix itself? Is it her own fault for not being an expert on caffeinated beverages before buying the drink?

I would be curious to know if the caffeine content is listed by Panera just for the sake of being curious. They could actually make an argument in court stating she should have seen the caffeine content at the time ordering.
I think the next argument to be made is that the caffeine content is for consumers without those conditions. They could simply state, "how could the company have known, because our beverages and the contents of caffeine are risky as is."
I would like to know how much God damned caffeine has to be in something to cause someone like this to die. That is wild to me. I mean I wouldn't drink more than one Red Bull in a day and things like 5-Hour Energy legit made me paranoid and gave me the shakes. I know where my body tolerance is.
I think I would be curious to know if the risks were posted or rather the caffeine content was posted. Most people with peanut allergies are not peanut experts but they stay aware of not being able to eat things deep fried in peanuts.
What has happened to her is really sad it's not a question of whether she is collateral damage. It is a question of whether legally companies like Panera are posting warnings and caffeine content listings. I would also like to know if this is an employee mistake. Did someone accidentally over caffeinate the beverage.
Lots of questions here. I feel sorry for the family and it is unfortunate small things like this can kill a person. It makes you realize how small life can be and how vulnerable we are. I do feel like there is a responsibility on both parties sides but her responsibility is asking whether she knew the amount of caffeine content. Their responsibility would be determining whether that caffeine content was visible and there for her to see or even hear at the time of purchase or whether warnings should be posted by caffeine the same as they are posted by a boiling drink or food or whether something contains, nuts or eggs, etc. Additionally, should they legally be allowed to sell something with that amount of caffeine.
- It's absolutely about her being collateral damage.
  If we weren't living in a 24/7 internet/news world (say, even ~20 years ago), we wouldn't have access to news articles about this kind of thing. The articles likely wouldn't exist at all. The vast majority of consumers would have no idea that this girl died from this drink, and people who enjoy to consume it (heart condition or no), will continue putting themselves at risk. Panera would still sell this product, and the profit margin is massive. Why would they stop when literally nobody knows the drink killed a girl?
  And this would keep happening until "the invisible hand" of the market corrects things, if it ever does. Because it only really could if enough people heard about the dangers of this beverage to literally put them out of business. And we've already established that these stories weren't a common thing until recently.
  How many people do you think would need to die for that happen?
  This honestly isn't even a great example, but it still works. Just look at any dangerous product that ruined or ended countless lives in the not so distant past, before the government was forced to step in to regulate (asbestos, thalidomide, lead, CFCs, etc etc). Note that all of those things would never have been outlawed/regulated if the government hadn't stepped in. If we would have just sat back and allowed the free market to handle it, millions more would be dead, and there would still be an ever growing hole in the ozone layer.
  All just collateral damage in the bullshit concept of free markets

I feel like Panera has lost its way after JAB bought it. This wouldn't fly before and some of their menu items now are just pure excess.

Ever since "casual dining" became the buzzword for restaurant investors.

Energy drinks should be sold by prescription only.

had a heart condition

Does personal responsibility not exist anymore? The menu and advertising for the drink clearly show that it has a high caffeine content.

and was not aware of the drink’s caffeine content, which exceeded that of cans of Red Bull and Monster energy drinks combined

The drink has about 260mg of caffeine which, while high, isn't outrageous or unsafe to most healthy adults by any means.

Maybe someone can show me how I'm being a heartless arsehole but I can't find any negligent action on Panera's part that would make them to blame.

"Katz had a heart condition called long QT syndrome type 1 and avoided energy drinks at the recommendation of her doctors, according to the filing.
... “She was very, very vigilant about what she needed to do to keep herself safe,” Conroy said. “I guarantee if Sarah had known how much caffeine this was, she never would have touched it with a 10-foot pole.”
... The charged lemonade was “offered side-by-side with all of Panera’s non-caffeinated and/or less caffeinated drinks” and was advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage that contained as much caffeine as the restaurant’s dark roast coffee...
...The charged lemonade also has guarana extract, another stimulant, as well as the equivalent of nearly 30 teaspoons of sugar"
You either did not read even half the article, or you did and then completely forgot or ignored the contents. Which was it?
- I have a lobster allergy. I am very, very vigilant about it because I don't like being rushed to the ER. I had imitation crab meat that happened to have lobster in it once. Didn't even think to ask. That was my fault.
  The charged lemonade was “offered side-by-side with all of Panera’s non-caffeinated and/or less caffeinated drinks
  I'd love to see a picture of that. At my local Panera it's right next to the ice tea and has a giant sign on it about being highly caffeinated. There's a few pictures around about them behind the counter with no visible sign, so lacking more info this above quote works in Panera's favor for me.
  advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage
  Let me complete the sentence. It's advertised as "Plant-based, clean caffeine powered by guarana & green coffee extract". The quote provided in the article comes from the posted caffeine notice. The other ones are advertised as "Plant-based and Clean with as much caffeine as our Dark Roast coffee". And the plaintiff is trying to argue "it has more caffeine than the dark roast", which is one of those "misleading truths" I've gotten into elsewhere. It's less caffeinated per ounce, and not the highest caffeine drink they sell.
  …The charged lemonade also has guarana extract, another stimulant, as well as the equivalent of nearly 30 teaspoons of sugar
  For guarana, it's on the sign but not advertised as well. If the entire complaint was that she couldn't have guarana, they might have a point. If the complaint is that the sign was missing or hidden, they would have a point. Every piece of signage online or in-store I've seen they have the word "Charged", they mention that it's caffeinated.
  I don't want to say personal responsibility... fuck that. Somebody died. It's a tragedy, but short of more info than in the article, not wrongful death. Thing is, this could be like the McDonalds coffee thing where a lot of people left out that the coffee temperature was calibrated wrong and the lady got third degree burns from it.
It does. But we still have safety stickers and ingredient lists, etc for a really damn good reason.
- Absolutely. Legally speaking, the warnings/labeling are crucial. And they depend heavily on context. Using a common name like lemonade in a unique way puts the threshold even higher.
  Also legally speaking, people blaming the heart condition fail to understand US tort law. The responsibility falls to the provider, not the victim, even if they are unusually fragile (have a heart condition). This is the eggshell skull aka eggshell plaintiff doctrine, very well established in US law.
  And if you dive deep into the train of thought of what happens without it (companies blame everything on too fragile/frail of people), most people find it to be reasonable.
  The provider must make it safe for everyone OR place adequate protections/warnings that make it very clear who it’s not safe for. Seems like Panera failed on both accounts.
  https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/eggshell_skull_rule
Ah yes "personal responsibility" the rallying cry of empathy free assholes everywhere. And yes you are an asshole for that victim blaming shit opinion of yours.
- I mean, personal responsibility IS a thing, it just depends on context. In this case, there seems to be plenty of reason to think the company is at fault.
- There's a gulf between "personal responsibility" and "wrongful death" called "tragedy".
  I don't think anyone should be blaming the dead girl. But the limited evidence I've seen so far doesn't make Panera look guilty either.
260mg is in the 20oz version, but I'm pretty sure you can get whatever giant sized drink you want. The article said she had a 30oz drink which has 390mg of caffeine. Also, even just 260mg of caffeine is WAY more caffeine than anyone needs in one drink, even if its considered "safe". There's literally no reason for it. Something that's self serve and has that much caffeine should have a giant warning on the front and require a waiver to be signed first. I looked up the picture of the machine where the drink is served, and it says at the very bottom how much caffeine is in it, but if someone is on their way to work or class then they probably aren't stopping to read the literature on what they thought was just plain lemonade
- Also, even just 260mg of caffeine is WAY more caffeine than anyone needs in one drink, even if its considered “safe”.
  That's the caffeine content in a large hot coffee from Dunkin Donuts, one of the most popular orders in the my region of the world. Putting it proportion, this lemonade is about 2/3 of the caffeine, oz for oz, of black coffee. Have you seen a 30oz drink? They're fairly massive.
  I looked up the picture of the machine where the drink is served, and it says at the very bottom how much caffeine is in it, but if someone is on their way to work or class then they probably aren’t stopping to read the literature on what they thought was just plain lemonade
  I've accidentally ordered food I was allergic to, so I get it. There's absolutely nothing a company can do to be 100% sure nobody will ever order food that will harm them.
- A waiver for a 260mg drink? A large monster can is close to that. A Bang Energy is 300mg.
  Should they be that strong? Up to you to decide. But saying you need a waiver for something that's already widely available is nonsense.
I also made the mistake. Personally I don’t care, especially since I was looking for a flavor shot with soda, but these are in the same dispensers that used to hold juice, in the same spot, and there probably still are some regular juices there. I suppose we should read every sign, but it’s not in human nature. Who would think to check the caffeine content of what appears to be juice?
I imagine that signs are posted, but it’s set up to be misleading. Panera missed the opportunity for splashy marketing (at least where I was) which could have both sold more and communicated better
- Panera missed the opportunity for splashy marketing (at least where I was)
  Interesting. All I knew about this stuff before this article was that it was highly caffeinated. I haven't tried it (and don't plan to. I like coffee) but it's really obvious in some areas.
was advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage that contained as much caffeine as the restaurant’s dark roast coffee, according to photos of both the menu and beverage dispensers in the store
But at 390 milligrams, the large Charged Lemonade has more caffeine than any size of Panera’s dark roast coffee, the complaint says — numbers that the nutrition facts on Panera’s website confirm. It also has guarana extract, another stimulant, as well as the equivalent of nearly 30 teaspoons of sugar
The marketing was factually wrong and very misleading.
- The complete quotes in the marketing (the article made the odd decision to quote PART OF the caffeine description out-of-context) are:
  “Plant-based, clean caffeine powered by guarana & green coffee extract”.
  and
  “Plant-based and Clean with as much caffeine as our Dark Roast coffee”
  I would call that marketing accurate and correct. Except one thing... It's a fact that one ounce of their lemonade has significantly less caffeine (about 2/3) than one ounce of their dark roast coffee, and dramatically less than their light roast coffee. Could you have guessed that from the quotes? Because my first point of note is that they're incorrect about it having "as much caffeine as our Dark Roast".
  the large Charged Lemonade has more caffeine than any size of Panera’s dark roast coffee
  This is also both misleading and carefully worded. It's comparing a 16oz cup to a 30oz cup, both sold with unlimited refills, and leaving out that the Charged Lemonade is not even the highest-caffeine item on the menu.
  I would say the article is factually wrong and misleading. The problem is, we don't know the full details of the complaint, which might actually be valid. The article, however, is not doing it justice.
The article claims it has 390 mg and was sold alongside noncaffeinated drinks, though I'm not clear exactly how misleading they were about the amount of caffeine in there. I agree with you -- it seems wild to me that an adult with a heart condition like that wouldn't check any caffeinated drink to see the caffeine quantity before drinking it...
- it seems wild to me that an adult with a heart condition like that wouldn't check any caffeinated drink to see the caffeine quantity before drinking it...
  The issue is that she didn't know it had caffeine, presumably because it wasn't obvious when ordering it. She may have just thought "charged lemonade" was the name they gave their regular lemonade drink and didn't think anything of it. I wouldn't think to ask for the caffeine content of a lemonade, either.
- Does it change your mind if there's a large sign on the dispenser saying it's highly caffeinated and including big bold caffeine content numbers?
  We don't know if the sign was there in this tragedy, but we know it's standard Panera marketing to have it there.
I'd say it depends. I've never seen an ad for panera lemonade, and I don't need to look at a menu to know what lemonade is. Many drinks sometimes have caffeine, like root beer or orange soda. You have to be careful about which brand you're getting. There are zero caffeinated lemonades on the market besides lemonade flavored energy drinks and Panera.
260mg is the small. The large has 390mg. 400mg is where the fda says adverse effects begin for normal people. That is a lot of caffeine under any circumstance.
Did she order a lemonade and get a max dose energy drink, or did she specifically order a max dose energy drink?
- 400mg is where the fda says adverse effects begin for normal people.
  That's not exactly right. 400mg is the line the FDA says NO adverse affects happen for normal people. They're not saying >400mg is dangerous, they're saying <400mg is safe and healthy.
  Considering the drinking patterns of caffeine (one big boost, not something you drink all day unless you're from New England), that makes sense to me. When I walk into a Dunkies and get a large Iced, it's 400mg of caffeine.
- Because the people who have even only skimmed the article or the quotes in this thread know the article already answers basic questions about personal responsibility.
  You did read the linked article, right?
Correct. Same goes with allergies etc.

Did you read the article?
"Katz had a heart condition called long QT syndrome type 1 and avoided energy drinks at the recommendation of her doctors, according to the filing.
was advertised as a “plant-based and clean” beverage that contained as much caffeine as the restaurant’s dark roast coffee, according to photos of both the menu and beverage dispensers in the store
also contained guarana
I keep seeing the "personal responsibility" phrase in this thread and I feel like it's missing the point. I suppose the thinking is "some people ruin it for everyone", but frankly where is the corporate responsibilities? As another poster put it, why is a quadruple monster sold at a place famous for their soup? That amount of stimulus is intense for people without health conditions. Would the general public truly be losing out if Panera had this labeled as several energy drinks flavored lemonade?
The larger issue is that caffeine should be regulated to a higher degree than it is, but Panera received tons of backlash a year ago when this was debuted and ignored it. Chains this size have their meals painstakingly tested and formulated, it was reckless to treat this as just another fountain drink.
- why is a quadruple monster sold at a place famous for their soup?
  Let me ask the counter-question. Why is a half-strength coffee sold at a place known as a major coffee-and-study spot?
  Panera as a business has often needed to ride multiple markets to survive, and the giant coffee setups they've had for the last 20 years when you walk in every door doesn't scream "soup". Have you ever heard of the Unlimited Sip Club? They sell various drinks, but the primary marketing image is a girl holding a giant iced coffee (which has at least as much caffeine as the charged lemonade). And honestly, they've always been fairly open about the fact almost every beverage they sell is caffeinated and there are absolutely (unlimited refill) items on the menu with more caffeine than these charged lemonades.
  The only argument that IMO gives Panera any responsibility on this is the people who showed pictures of SOME Paneras where the giant" as caffeinated as our coffee" sign is hidden behind the counter. They literally lie upwards in caffeine content in their warnings (20oz of this drink is only as caffeinated as 8oz of their coffee but they say it's the same content)
  If I were an asshole lawyer, I would file a suit that they were misleading by claiming it's as caffeinated as their coffee. In fact, I'm guessing that would be their slam-dunk defense except we all know they'll settle because they don't want bad press.
  The larger issue is that caffeine should be regulated to a higher degree than it is
  Does that mean you also want to put coffee and iced-coffee dispensers under lock and key? They have a LOT more caffeine than this drink. I've paid for bottomless coffee before and taken generous advantage of it. The issue was this girl had an underlying medical condition and was supposed to avoid caffeine. Period.
  And their lawyers argument is that Panera doesn't sell a dark roast coffee with 390ml total caffeine because they're 16oz cups (with unlimited refills)
  Honestly, it's a tragedy. But Panera is only to blame if there's information we don't have in the article that makes them so.
Wtf lemonade are you drinking that's high in caffeine?