Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Friday March 30 2018, @08:20PM   Printer-friendly
from the post-contains-comments-known-to-the-State-of-California-to-cause-cancer-or-reproductive-toxicity dept.

Coffee sold in California must carry cancer warning, judge rules

Coffee sold in California must carry a cancer warning, a court has ruled. The judge in Los Angeles said Starbucks and about 90 other coffee sellers had failed to warn customers about a potentially toxic compound that is produced during the roasting process.

The firms were sued by a California-based non profit-group over the chemical acrylamide. The group argued that as acrylamide is regarded as carcinogenic under state law, it should be sold with a warning.

Ruling in favour of the Council for Education and Research on Toxics, Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle said the companies should not be exempt from the law, as they had failed to prove that the "consumption of coffee confers a benefit to human health". The companies have until 10 April to appeal the decision.

Also at The San Diego Union-Tribune.

Related: California Issues Warning Over Cellphones; Study Links Non-Ionizing Radiation to Miscarriage


Original Submission

Related Stories

California Issues Warning Over Cellphones; Study Links Non-Ionizing Radiation to Miscarriage 30 comments

California recommends keeping cellphones/smartphones away from your body, as well as "reducing the use of cell phones to stream audio or video, or to download or upload large files":

The California Department of Public Health (CDPH) issued a warning against the hazards of cellphone radiation this week. Yes, the thing we are all addicted to and can't seem to put down is leaking electromagnetic radiation and now California has some guidance to safeguard the public.

The CDPH asks people to decrease their use of these devices and suggests keeping your distance when possible. "Although the science is still evolving, there are concerns among some public health professionals and members of the public regarding long-term, high use exposure to the energy emitted by cell phones," said CDPH director Dr. Karen Smith.

The warning comes after findings were offered up this week from a 2009 department document, which was published after an order from the Sacramento Superior Court. A year ago, UC Berkeley professor Joel Moskowitz initiated a lawsuit to get the department to release the findings after he started looking into whether mobile phone use increased the risk of tumors. A draft of the document was released in March, but the final release is more extensive.

Separately, a new study has linked non-ionizing radiation to an increased risk of miscarriage:

A study of real-world exposure to non-ionizing radiation from magnetic fields in pregnant women found a significantly higher rate of miscarriage, providing new evidence regarding their potential health risks. The Kaiser Permanente study was published today in the journal Scientific Reports (Nature Publishing Group).

Non-ionizing radiation from magnetic fields is produced when electric devices are in use and electricity is flowing. It can be generated by a number of environmental sources, including electric appliances, power lines and transformers, wireless devices and wireless networks. Humans are exposed to magnetic fields via close proximity to these sources while they are in use.

Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A Prospective Cohort Study (open, DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-16623-8) (DX)

Also at Environmental Working Group.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by archfeld on Friday March 30 2018, @08:31PM (10 children)

    by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Friday March 30 2018, @08:31PM (#660519) Journal

    Anything charred over an open flame, fried in oil (potato chips) or generally processed from raw form causes cancer. It is along the lines of life causes death. Been that way forever and will likely always be that way. The trick is to enjoy the ride and not worry about the ultimate destination, or so I've been told...

    --
    For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by frojack on Friday March 30 2018, @09:03PM (4 children)

      by frojack (1554) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:03PM (#660534) Journal

      But coffee is not charred over an open flame.

      https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/diet/acrylamide-fact-sheet#q3 [cancer.gov]

      ".a large number of epidemiologic studies (both case-control and cohort studies) in humans have found no consistent evidence that dietary acrylamide exposure is associated with the risk of any type of cancer"
      . The U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulates the amount of residual acrylamide in a variety of materials that contact food, but there are currently no guidelines governing the presence of acrylamide in food itself.

      This is what happens when we let judges decide scientific facts.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @09:23PM (2 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @09:23PM (#660539)

        This is what happens when we let judges decide scientific facts.

        Do you expect any kind of sanity from the state that decriminalised deliberately infecting someone with HIV? The state that refuses to deal with a massive homelessness problem while simultaneously offering sanctuary for illegals as the middle class exodus continues? And with the secession movement, they're aiming for peak retard - Venezuela style.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @10:22PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @10:22PM (#660562)

          I dunno, apparently some other state beat us to it. Where do you live?

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @03:03PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @03:03PM (#660851)

          Yeah I still remember the day when jimmy carter created the sanctuary concept from thin air. It would be just a few months later that Reagan would own him and start helping the homeless.

      • (Score: 3, Informative) by archfeld on Sunday April 01 2018, @01:32AM

        by archfeld (4650) <treboreel@live.com> on Sunday April 01 2018, @01:32AM (#661021) Journal

        How else is coffee roasted ?
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_roasting [wikipedia.org]

        --
        For the NSA : Explosives, guns, assassination, conspiracy, primers, detonators, initiators, main charge, nuclear charge
    • (Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Friday March 30 2018, @09:38PM (3 children)

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:38PM (#660547)

      fried in oil (potato chips)

      Came here to flog the bigger sources of acrylamides, like potato chips.

      the intake level required to observe neuropathy (0.5 mg/kg body weight/day) was 500 times higher than the average dietary intake of acrylamide (1 μg/kg body weight/day). - wikipedia

      however, carcinogenic effects come on at much lower doses and the exact relationship is not understood at this time (nor likely to be well understood soon.)

      https://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodborneIllnessContaminants/ChemicalContaminants/ucm053549.htm [fda.gov]

      Eat 4 ounces (113g) of Kettle Chips Lightly Salted Natural Gourmet Potato Chips (1265ppb measured acrylimides) and you've consumed 143ug of acrylamide. If you weigh 50kg, that's nearly 3x the "average dietary intake" quoted from Wikipedia above. You'd have to binge pretty heavily (20kg of chips) to hit the neuropathy levels, but California isn't labeling about neuropathy.

      For comparison, dark roast coffees run around 200-300 ppb acrylamides in ground form, and 5-10 ppb when brewed.

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
      • (Score: 2) by frojack on Friday March 30 2018, @11:20PM (2 children)

        by frojack (1554) on Friday March 30 2018, @11:20PM (#660602) Journal

        to hit the neuropathy levels,

        Sentence seemed to make more sense when I substituted "naturopathy" for neuropathy, but then your link looked like tl;dr so I didn't pursue it too deeply.

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 5, Funny) by JoeMerchant on Friday March 30 2018, @11:34PM (1 child)

          by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday March 30 2018, @11:34PM (#660609)

          If you're talking about homeopathy levels, then all you have to do is imagine the substance in your food and you've got a homeopathic dose.

          --
          🌻🌻 [google.com]
          • (Score: 3, Insightful) by khallow on Saturday March 31 2018, @01:38AM

            by khallow (3766) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 31 2018, @01:38AM (#660657) Journal

            then all you have to do is imagine the substance in your food

            And the less you think about it, the stronger the dose!

    • (Score: 4, Funny) by chewbacon on Saturday March 31 2018, @01:04AM

      by chewbacon (1032) on Saturday March 31 2018, @01:04AM (#660643)

      Don't forget new car smell.

  • (Score: 4, Touché) by bradley13 on Friday March 30 2018, @08:41PM (7 children)

    by bradley13 (3053) on Friday March 30 2018, @08:41PM (#660521) Homepage Journal

    Of course, if everything carries a warning, they become meaningless.

    More to the point, apparently all of the difficult problems have been solved, if they have time for crap like this.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
    • (Score: 4, Funny) by MostCynical on Friday March 30 2018, @09:30PM (4 children)

      by MostCynical (2589) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:30PM (#660542) Journal

      hammers. Hammers cause injury or death in 100% of tests involving hitting people on the head.
      Hanmers need warning labels!

      --
      "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @10:27PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @10:27PM (#660564)

        Hammers? Sheesh, what about the overwhelming danger of toothpicks?

        Eh fuckit, I'm turning my house inside out.

      • (Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Friday March 30 2018, @10:31PM

        by bob_super (1357) on Friday March 30 2018, @10:31PM (#660569)

        "warning: only use with calibrated zombies"

      • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 31 2018, @02:28PM

        by maxwell demon (1608) on Saturday March 31 2018, @02:28PM (#660849) Journal

        Humans are dangerous. There should be a warning label attached to them right at birth! ;-)

        --
        The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @03:11PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @03:11PM (#660854)

        Defective hammers, however, don’t.

        Conclusion

        Make all items defective. No need for warning specific items. Stuff will break faster. Those that can afford it will buy new defective shit (not the recently out of work and not retrained safety warning who are now homeless). Profit.

        Campaign in 2020 for the out of work safety peeps. (Coal miners are so 10s). But under no circumstances should you retrain the newest homeless class. Jesus won’t tolerate those who can’t help themselves. Damn lazy fucks. Gees Louise!!!

    • (Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday March 30 2018, @10:38PM (1 child)

      by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday March 30 2018, @10:38PM (#660573) Homepage

      That sounds like a racist statement to me.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @03:17PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @03:17PM (#660857)

        Jesus was a nazi race hater, no?

        If not, why are you?

  • (Score: 2) by Snotnose on Friday March 30 2018, @08:45PM (1 child)

    by Snotnose (1623) on Friday March 30 2018, @08:45PM (#660524)

    has been found to cause cancer. Too bad you've already read it.

    Seriously, I've been in CA for over 50 years now and it's getting embarrassing.

    --
    Why shouldn't we judge a book by it's cover? It's got the author, title, and a summary of what the book's about.
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @12:54AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @12:54AM (#660641)

      It's gotten to the point where so many things carry that label that nobody pays any attention to them.

      Those labels should really be limited to situations where the chemicals represent a significant risk of cancer, not just a possible link in some cases, but we don't know why sort of risk. Same goes for all those warning labels and those "hot" dishes that get served at restaurants.

      I wind up touching them anyways because I need to know if they're really hot so that I know whether or not to expect to be burned if I accidentally touch them later. And in all the years I've been doing it, I don't think that in more than a handful of cases has the dish even been uncomfortably warm.

  • (Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Friday March 30 2018, @08:49PM (13 children)

    by insanumingenium (4824) on Friday March 30 2018, @08:49PM (#660528) Journal

    TFA states that the minimum dose for adverse effects is 425 times the average adult dose of coffee. If accurate, that seems pretty safe to me. How exactly does a human consume hundreds of times the average dose of coffee, google suggests the average amount is 2.1 drinks per day in the US. If the minimum amount to see adverse effects is almost 900 a day, I think we are going to be OK, even Phillip J Fry only managed 100 before hitting hyperspeed.

    • (Score: 2) by Booga1 on Friday March 30 2018, @08:59PM (1 child)

      by Booga1 (6333) on Friday March 30 2018, @08:59PM (#660531)

      You'll die of hyponatremia [wikipedia.org] first.

      • (Score: 2) by insanumingenium on Friday March 30 2018, @09:20PM

        by insanumingenium (4824) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:20PM (#660538) Journal

        Unless you salt your coffee. Can you imagine a normal saline drib brewed coffee? Or did we read recently Ringer's lactate was a better choice.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @08:59PM (9 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @08:59PM (#660532)

      Holy carp! Wouldn't we have to worry about cardiac health before cancer then?

      • (Score: 2) by frojack on Friday March 30 2018, @09:07PM (8 children)

        by frojack (1554) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:07PM (#660535) Journal

        Nope. You may well have MORE cardiac issues following this Judge's orders than not.

        3 to 5 Cups of Coffee a Day May Lower Risk of Heart Attacks!!!
        https://www.livescience.com/50012-coffee-heart-attack-risk.html [livescience.com]

        --
        No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
        • (Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Friday March 30 2018, @09:16PM (6 children)

          by bobthecimmerian (6834) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:16PM (#660536)

          I think the anonymous person was referring to what would happen if you drank enough coffee to reach the 425 threshold in one day, several hundred cups' worth. That probably would kill you, caffeine is toxic in high enough concentrations.

          The problem with studies that indicate coffee aids health is that the people funding them have a financial incentive to find anything. If they conduct 30 studies and 29 find no positive relationship between coffee intake and health, they just dump the 29 studies and shout the one that seemed to work from the rooftops. That doesn't automatically mean the study is invalid, but don't take it at face value.

          • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @10:30PM (5 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 30 2018, @10:30PM (#660568)

            > If they conduct 30 studies and 29 find no positive relationship between coffee intake and health, they just dump the 29 studies and shout the one that seemed to work from the rooftops.

            https://www.xkcd.com/882/ [xkcd.com]

            • (Score: 3, Funny) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday March 30 2018, @10:42PM (4 children)

              by Ethanol-fueled (2792) on Friday March 30 2018, @10:42PM (#660577) Homepage

              The state of California has labeled XKCD carcinogenic due to its lack of trans, undocumented, or HIV-positive characters as well as for its being criminally unfunny.

              • (Score: 2) by pipedwho on Saturday March 31 2018, @05:32AM (3 children)

                by pipedwho (2032) on Saturday March 31 2018, @05:32AM (#660735)

                I’m not even sure xkcd is supposed to be funny. It’s more about pointing out something obvious that otherwise alludes the reasoning of people that don’t think critically.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @06:01AM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @06:01AM (#660737)

                  I emailed your comment to Munroe.

                • (Score: 2) by bobthecimmerian on Saturday March 31 2018, @02:14PM

                  by bobthecimmerian (6834) on Saturday March 31 2018, @02:14PM (#660846)

                  Some are informative, some are just odd, some are hilarious.

                • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @06:29PM

                  by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @06:29PM (#660913)

                  Not every person ponders the vagueries of reality like xkcd.

        • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday March 30 2018, @10:29PM

          by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 30 2018, @10:29PM (#660566) Journal

          Which makes it interesting that he ruled

          they had failed to prove that the "consumption of coffee confers a benefit to human health".

          Possibly they needed better lawyers.

          --
          Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday March 30 2018, @11:31PM

      by JoeMerchant (3937) on Friday March 30 2018, @11:31PM (#660607)

      How exactly does a human consume hundreds of times the average dose of coffee

      Expresso!

      --
      🌻🌻 [google.com]
  • (Score: 2) by MostCynical on Friday March 30 2018, @09:32PM (1 child)

    by MostCynical (2589) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:32PM (#660545) Journal

    coffee: experts cannot prove to a court that acrylamide in coffee doesn't cause cancer.

    --
    "I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
    • (Score: 4, Funny) by Dr Spin on Friday March 30 2018, @09:46PM

      by Dr Spin (5239) on Friday March 30 2018, @09:46PM (#660549)

      It should, however, be fairly easy to prove that exposure to the American legislative process causes insanity.

      --
      Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @12:46AM (4 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @12:46AM (#660638)

    Great. This place is flooded with "everything causes cancer" meta-philosophers.

      No, everything does not cause cancer.
    Yes, acrylamide causes cancer.
    Acrylamide is formed when roasting coffee beans (also chocolate beans, hence always consume choc processed at low-temperature (below 42C). Raw chocolate. Pana chocolate is one such product)
    Acrylamide is known to cause cancer.... Its the same chemical found in burnt toast and roasted/fried potatoes.
    So what else did you expect the labels to say?

    Unlike chocolate, there is no easy way to avoid acrylamide forming in coffee. Best choice i think is to reduce intake. What may help, based on what I've read: reduce, then switch to wet process beans, and dark roast, and stick to drip filtered coffee.

    • (Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @12:57AM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @12:57AM (#660642)

      Everything doesn't cause cancer, but the list of things that appear to cause cancer in a laboratory setting is long enough that most of these warnings are pointless. And in many cases the dosage necessary to get cancer isn't even realistically possible without going to significant effort to up the dosage.

      These warning stickers do little to protect people from real harm as they're on so many different products that nobody really pays much attention to them. Warning labels should be reserved for substances that have a much higher likelihood of causing cancer than anything in coffee.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @08:31AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @08:31AM (#660772)

        I disagree in this specific instance. The risk is real. Labs are a simulation of the outside world... they have their limitations but are the next best thing to experimenting on humans.

        The stickers should also attach to crisps and fries, and if necessary, bread. We forget how new and unsafe these foods are. I write, having just plowed through my McChicken Meal. I am leaving behind half my fries, the batter on my crispy chicken, half a bun and most of the cone of my soft serve cone. And I am having McDonalds for the first time in six months.

        • (Score: 3, Interesting) by shortscreen on Saturday March 31 2018, @10:08AM

          by shortscreen (2252) on Saturday March 31 2018, @10:08AM (#660797) Journal

          Humans cook their food. This is a feature, not a bug.

          And eat the rest of your fries. There are starving children in Yemen, you know.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @09:30PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @09:30PM (#660949)

      QUICK! We need cancer labels on toast!

  • (Score: 2) by Virindi on Saturday March 31 2018, @01:28AM (2 children)

    by Virindi (3484) on Saturday March 31 2018, @01:28AM (#660652)

    I say do it. It will only serve to demonstrate to people who ridiculous the law is.

    Everything sold in CA should have a cancer warning. I mean, surely there is ONE molecule in there somewhere that kinda maybe causes cancer if a rat is fed its body weight in that molecule...

    It makes no difference, right, that no causal link can be demonstrated at the levels found in the product?

    • (Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 31 2018, @02:45PM (1 child)

      by maxwell demon (1608) on Saturday March 31 2018, @02:45PM (#660850) Journal

      Somebody should make a study that shows exposure to warning labels might cause cancer. ;-)

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
      • (Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @10:05PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 31 2018, @10:05PM (#660964)

        Warning: The adhesive on the back of this warning label may cause cancer.

(1)