this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2023
510 points (97.8% liked)

News

23296 readers
3394 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Panera Bread’s highly caffeinated Charged Lemonade is now blamed for a second death, according to a lawsuit filed Monday.

Dennis Brown, of Fleming Island, Florida, drank three Charged Lemonades from a local Panera on Oct. 9 and then suffered a fatal cardiac arrest on his way home, the suit says.

Brown, 46, had an unspecified chromosomal deficiency disorder, a developmental delay and a mild intellectual disability. He lived independently, frequently stopping at Panera after his shifts at a supermarket, the legal complaint says. Because he had high blood pressure, he did not consume energy drinks, it adds.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If any sugar soaked beverage is allowed to be marketed as a health drink, that's a problem that applies to the entire industry.

And drinking 90oz is the fault of the consumer, remember how much blowback there was when New York banned selling drinks above a certain volume? The people want to be able to do drink ungodly amounts of soft drink, apparently.

Only thing I really blame Panera for is not clearly labeling how much caffeine is in a cup, which I also don't really blame them for because the last time I went to Starbucks or McDonald's I couldn't find out which latte had the most caffeine, so that's standard behavior I guess.

Push for more required disclosure if you'd like, I'd probably agree, but Panera was not out of line IMO.

[–] Clasm@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

If it is an industry problem, then this sort of event is usually what snowballs into actual change.

The tip of this case, I believe, isn't just the caffeine content, but the fact that it:

  • Wasn't exactly labeled as a high-caf drink.
  • Was often next to, or in place of, non-caf drinks.
  • Was marketed as part of an unlimited drinks program.

While the company isn't required to cater to individuals with very specific tolerances of the simulant, they likely had data available to them that suggests that this outcome was always a possibility, yet they supposedly ran the product until people died.

[–] Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

To be fair, its absurdly stupid to think banning the sale of large drinks does anything positive for anyone. I never get larges of anything, but I'll fight stupid laws like that any time.

[–] abbotsbury@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

ehh, I think it makes sense in that it eliminates perverse incentives like "give us 50 cents more and you can double your already extra large soda," but as implemented it was certainly just a lazy band-aid solution