Panera, formerly Panera Bread.

This is THE SECOND person who died from drinking this.

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why legislate? If there is legislation, it should merely be around labeling, like something to the effect of:

    “Contains 300mg caffeine, which is equivalent to 3 cups of brewed black coffee, 6 cups of black tea, or 15 cups of cola.”

    Now the customer has a point of reference and can decide for themselves, and all Panera needs to do is correctly label their products. We already have legislation around nutritional labeling, and we can make them more strict for items on menus with certain classes of ingredients.

    • a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would agree with that. And maybe something more explicit about exceeding the safe intake levels by huge percentages.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Perhaps, though “safe” can vary quite a bit from person to person and trying to be descriptive could make the sign so complex that people won’t read it. So something like:

        Health warning:
        Contains XXXmg caffeine,
        equivalent to ☕☕☕

        It’s easy to understand at a glance.

        • a lil bee 🐝@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The same applies to daily intake recommendations and BMI too, but they’re still helpful measures to exist. I like your suggestion, I would just add one more line (and only in cases over a certain threshold) to your example with something like “Exceeds daily recommended intake by x%, which can be a risk for those with underlying heart conditions”.