A Prop 65 annoucement by the OEHHA: Chemicals Submitted to the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee for Consultation:

The California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) is the lead agency for the implementation of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65). In this notice, OEHHA is announcing the list of chemicals identified through the “Process for Prioritizing Chemicals for Consideration Under Proposition 65 by the State’s Qualified Experts,” which was adopted in 2004. These chemicals have been identified for possible preparation of hazard identification materials. OEHHA will consult with the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee (DARTIC) at meeting of the DARTIC scheduled for Monday, December 10, 2007 concerning whether to prepare hazard identification materials for any of the following chemicals:

Bisphenol-A (CAS# 80-05-7)

Bromodichloromethane (CAS# 75-27-4)

Caffeine (CAS# 58-08-2)

Chlorpyrifos (CAS# 2921-88-2)

Chromium (hexavalent) (CAS# 18540-29-2)

DDE (CAS# 72-55-9)

Methylisocyanate (CAS# 624-83-9)

Sulfur dioxide (CAS# 7446-09-5)

For the full release, see: Chemicals Submitted to the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee for Consultation.

The Connecticut Post provides a discussion of beverage labeling in the United States:

Farrell and Blumenthal said that the company never paid a state licensing fee of $75 and was violating consumer-protection law by using the cocaine name to appeal to consumers as a “legal alternative” with 280 milligrams of caffeine per can, compared to Red Bull’s 80 mg.

Blumenthal added that the state worked with Texas and Illinois authorities to ban the beverage.

“This step will flush Cocaine out of our state and hopefully set a model for others as well,” he said. “We will now push for a nationwide ban, pulling this product off the shelves everywhere.”

“Beyond what the attorney general said, I think that there’s a simple message here that if you want to do business with the state of Connecticut you have to comply with our laws,” Farrell said, alleging that the company did not get a license from the food division of the Department of Consumer Protection.

Blumenthal said that it also violated state law. “To call a product a ‘legal alternative’ or ’speed in a can,’ is deceptive and misleading under our consumer-protection laws,” he said.

For the full article see: Company recalls ‘Cocaine’ energy drink

Might we see warning labels required on some energy drinks in the future? An article by Reuters suggests this may be in the cards:

Energy drinks that promise to boost performance and rev up metabolism can contain three to four times as much caffeine as a typical soda, a new study shows.

The concern, researchers say, is that consumers who are vulnerable to the ill effects of caffeine — including children, pregnant women and people with cardiovascular disease — may unknowingly ingest large amounts.

Energy drinks like Red Bull, Red Devil and Sobe “No Fear” typically contain a mix of carbohydrates, B vitamins, amino acids and caffeine. Manufacturers claim the beverages boost physical performance, concentration, metabolism and a blue mood.

So it’s not surprising that energy drinks would contain large amounts of caffeine, said study co-author Dr. Bruce A. Goldberger of the University of Florida College of Medicine in Gainesville.

But the actual caffeine dose might surprise some consumers, he told Reuters Health.

Given the danger of high caffeine intake to some people, energy drinks should be required to state their caffeine content clearly, Goldberger and his colleagues argue in their report, published in the Journal of Analytical Toxicology.

“We believe that these products should be labeled,” Goldberger said, noting that in Europe, drinks with more than 150 milligrams (mg) of caffeine per liter must be marked as “high-caffeine.

We’ll be watching this story closely, as it impacts many Nexreg clients and our readers.

See the full article: Reuters U.K..