The FDA steps in it
So the FDA has got its knickers in a knot about beer with caffeine in it. See the post here and the article here:
Apparently, the whole thing got started when they decided to take umbrage with caffeinated alcopops. Naturally, they’ve felt the need to pick on craft brewers as well. Fair’s fair, right? We need to protect the public from caffeinated beer.
Now, this is the agency that rams home an H1N1 vaccine in the name of political expediency, recommending it for use by children without having actually tested it on children. When there’s fear to sell, you can’t worry about things like due diligence. They also are a major supporter of the frankenfood industry that is increasing America’s obesity rates and decreasing its life expectancy.
So it comes as no surprise that the FDA isn’t really looking out for the best interests of the American consumer on this one. That they have now extended their bullying beyond alcopop into craft beer it is clear that they have completely stepped in it. Alcohol and caffeine are two legal drugs. They are legal in ridiculous quantities – overproof rum on one street corner, quart-sized coffee mugs on another – and completely without regulation.
The FDA is allegedly responding to complaints from attorneys general about wide awake drunks and the addictive properties of such beverages. Let me get this straight – alcohol and caffeine are addictive? I suppose next thing they’ll be telling us is that smoking at the casino might be habit-forming.
What I’m driving at is that there is no basis for the FDA’s claims. They are being 100% hypocritical, maybe 200 or 300% percent given the number of different ways in which they are being hypocritical on this issue. They have become all hot and bothered about a particular sub-category of alcoholic beverage. The category is not one that I personally find tasteful. I can only imagine how nasty those beverages taste. But they are not doing anything wrong. The FDA’s claim that there is no regulation allowing such beverages is backwards. In law, the lack of a law does not make an act illegal. Regulations need to be violated before a wrong has been committed. If no such regulation exists, it is up to the FDA to draft the legislation and then support it with scientific study. What the FDA is doing now is attempting to shift the burden of due diligence away from itself and onto the makers of these drinks.
That is entirely wrong-headed. The FDA only thinks it can get away with this because its power is relatively unchecked. Congress and the White House are not likely to weigh in on this issue, since the FDA is a vital agency for them, not the least for accelerated approvals on politically important vaccines.
So where does this leave the brewers? It looks a little bad right now. The FDA has a lot of clout. It is worth noting that the TTB (The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau) and the FDA seem to disagree on who has jurisdiction over the matter. However, the FDA has, in attempting to bully the ugly dirty kid and the little hippy kid, completely stepped in it. Big brewers make some of these caffeinated products. Pernod Ricard makes Kahlua, and they are a $10 billion company. And then there’s the entire hospitality industry. Ever had an Irish Coffee? Or any boozy coffee for that matter? How much are those drinks worth to the restaurant and bar industries – I’m going to go with quite a bit. If the FDA wants to crack down on caffeinated alcopop on the basis of the caffeine-alcohol combination, they’ll have to take on the entire restaurant industry and the world’s largest beverage companies. And for what? It has been pointed out in blogland that the complaining attorney generals are aligned with the Prohibitionist Center for Science in the Public Interest. Now we’re getting somewhere. This trial balloon served up by the FDA is another battle line being drawn and as usual our friends against alcohol start with the fringe and the little guys. May they get their comeuppance when the serious industry players are forced to get involved.
Could gave left out the jab at the “questionably safe” H1N1 vaccine. Leave that to the antivax nutjobs like Jenny McCarthy.
@ Tom: Jab…nicely done. I normally get flu shots, actually. But note I didn’t say “questionably safe”, I did just say “untested”, which is true. I am in no position to just its safeness. I just prefer drug approvals devoid of blatant PR motivations.
Asinine… over-reaching, ass-backwards, and hypocritical…
Hey, I’m not over-reaching!
It seems like an awful waste of FDA resources (which are already taxed as it is). They should be worrying about follow up studies on actual drugs, not trying to regulate caffeine usage. It’s a complete waste of time and it won’t really change anything… brewers will just switch to using decaffeinated coffee for these beers if they are so compelled. It would be interesting to see who is on the list of companies cited though… there are hundreds of coffee beers out there.
On the other hand, we’d never have to argue about Kopi Lupak coffee in beer again, so maybe there’s an upside.
Ah, duly noted Oakes.
http://www.beernet.com/publications_daily.php?id=1918
Thought it was worth posting this link to the companies named:
Ithaca, Thomas Creek, Melanie Brewing and New Century Brewing are the brewers on there… Kahlua is conspicuously absent.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by ratebeer and Kirsten Schlewitz, RateBeer Hop Press. RateBeer Hop Press said: Fresh off the Press The FDA Steps in It http://bit.ly/5PEEbH [...]
Raw dairy and eggs are exponentially more nutritious, yet the FDA deemed them dangerous and decided to favor agribusinesses by outlawing such goods in most states. Now don’t get me wrong– any food coming from factory farms should and must be pasteurized, for the animals are confined and held in unsanitary conditions, i.e. producing tainted milk and eggs. This beer/caffeine thing is just as misguided and stupefying. Very nice article, Josh!
The FDA does things very strangely. How many drugs get mired in “we need more tests to approve” while others sail past the approval boards- then are recalled because they kille people after all? And of course witch- hunts like this based mainly equating people mainlining Vodka- Red Bull combos with a beer that has a teensy caffiene content.
as a medical professional, i do not need this article to tell me that the FDA is a farce. the FDA turns its head on all of the unregulated, potentially harmful herbal supplements that can be purchased by anyone. dangerous drugs like Tagamet (cimetidine) are granted OTC status, despite the fact they are potent cytochrome p450 inhibitors. mix some tagamet with a glass of Bigfoot and see what happens to you.
anyway, i have lobbied for the removal of the FDA for many years. it is the main reason why prescription drugs are so incredibly expensive in the USA.
I agree with a lot of what you say, but are you really questioning the safety of the H1N1 vaccine? Also, it’s clear you don’t know what the term “due diligence” means.
Next time I would stick to the facts and leave the sensationalism at home.
Thanks to Josh for articulating these issues, and also to dycsoccer17 for being one of the few medical professionals to understand the farce and have the guts to speak about it.
I have nothing good to say about the American Food and Drug Abomination.
[...] The FDA Steps in It (HopPress) [...]
Sensationalism for sure, although the actions of the FDA here do need to be monitored and the public needs to react if it oversteps its authority. But, ignorant emotionalism is not a great way to counteract this potential problem.
In approving H1N1 vaccine, the FDA weighs the risks of not approving vs. approving. It is not a matter of waiting for all of the data to come in in any case. That’s why it granted the vaccination approval. Right or Wrong? Probably right at the time. Will they be showed wrong by history?
Secondly, the statement “in law, the lack of a law does not make an act illegal,” may be true, but completely out of place in this argument. For example, in medical devices, the FDA is regulating the US Federal Law that it is illegal to implant a device in someone without approval. Each device out there is given an “exception” to the law, based on the claims of the device, risks of having or not having, and the data. In this case, there is a general principle within food regulation that puts the makers in the same place for additives that are not generally recognized as safe for a specific application/use. That’s what is in question here. As and additive, that seems quite reasonable.
I’m not sure when it becomes an “additive” (didn’t read the FDA code on that), so I have no idea if this will extend into the craft beer industry. Again, this is a bit sensationalized, as I’m not even aware of such an action against the craft brewing industry, nor is there one cited in this write up?
This has MADD written all over it.
My friends, the prohibitionist movement is alive and well and rearing it’s ugly head once again.