Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“I’ll take a Venti Cancer , low fat latte please “
—-
Reuters) - Starbucks Corp (SBUX.O) and other coffee sellers must put a cancer warning on coffee sold in California, a Los Angeles judge has ruled, possibly exposing the companies to millions of dollars in fines.
A little-known not-for-profit group sued some 90 coffee retailers, including Starbucks, on grounds they were violating a California law requiring companies to warn consumers of chemicals in their products that could cause cancer.
One of those chemicals is acrylamide, a byproduct of roasting coffee beans that is present in high levels in brewed coffee.
"The lawsuit was filed in 2010 by the Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT). It calls for fines as large as $2,500 per person for every exposure to the chemical since 2002 at the defendants’ shops in California. Any civil penalties, which will be decided in a third phase of the trial, could be huge in California, which has a population of nearly 40 million."
California has really strict laws about placing warnings for cancer risks.
Do I think it's over the top? Yes, cancer can be linked to so many things.
But the law is very clear, and you will see warnings on all types of products sold in CA. These companies chose to ignore it, and should be hit with penalties.
The responses here are odd as hell though. The state is looking out for the health of it's citizens in an unobtrusive way. They want them to know about a risk, and let them make the decision for themselves.
California has really strict laws about placing warnings for cancer risks.
Do I think it's over the top? Yes, cancer can be linked to so many things.
But the law is very clear, and you will see warnings on all types of products sold in CA. These companies chose to ignore it, and should be hit with penalties.
The responses here are odd as hell though. The state is looking out for the health of it's citizens in an unobtrusive way. They want them to know about a risk, and let them make the decision for themselves.
there is no valid risk. that's why the responses are mostly eye-rolls at CA stupidity.
what's 'unobtrusive' about forcing companies to put farcical 'warning' labels on their products?
Everything you ingest, touch or just use on a daily basis should have a cancer warning. We all already have bad cells in us that have the potential to turn into cancer.
Somewhere on a coffee plantation deep in the Colombian countryside, Juan Valdez no longer smiles but instead stands weeping next to his faithful donkey Conchita.
"Ay caramba! Los gringos en California estan locos!"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We all already have bad cells in us that have the potential to turn into cancer.
