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.
Ahh but knowingly is the key word here. See, the company put the drink right next to their regular non caffeinated drinks such a regular lemonade, had no warning labels, and offered free refills on the drinks.
So how could they reasonably have known?
390mg is pushing right up against the FDAs safety limit for daily total intake.
Now, if you saw a drink called charged lemonade next to their regular lemonade, what would you think it was? Lemonade with some extra fruits perhaps?
You certainly wouldn’t think that it contains such a ridiculous level of caffeine that rides right up to the FDA safety line in a single cup, especially if they offer free refills.
No, I see the word ‘charged’ and I immediately think energy drinks.
Do red bull, monster, and starbucks put caffeine warnings on their products?
Do restaurants typically give out free refills on Red Bull, Monster, or Starbucks? “Charged” could easily be a knockoff Gatorade as their logo is a lighting bolt and I would never expect a restaurant to give out free energy drinks at the refill station.
That’s a really good point. I assumed it was a specialty drink where you have to pay for refills.
I can easily see people going overboard with this if it’s just a fountain drink like the rest of them.
coffee is typically free refills and entirely unlabeled
Coffee is also incredibly obvious that it’s caffeinated
Regular coffee yes, you indeed get refills.
Red Bull and monster do put caffeine warnings on their products, and Starbucks doesn’t have to because normal people understand that coffee has caffeine
“Charged” is not a standard term. Have you ever heard of charged cider? Charged seltzer? It’s not a thing. To be sure, I googled “charged cider,” and found one result. It is not caffeinated cider.
https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/b510c87d-d4cb-45e5-8f4a-47acac526a4c.jpeg
I’ve seen it. Any time I’ve shown that picture to someone unfamiliar with the story, I ask them which flavor sounds best to them, and then once I’ve taken my phone back, I ask them how much caffeine was in the drink. Every single person was dumbfounded. Why would lemonade have caffeine?
So you show them a picture and then ask them to focus on the flavors, and then take the picture away and then ask a different question. You do understand why that’s not scientific and is unfair to the results.
Yes, because that’s actually what’s physically happening when someone walks up to the lemonade dispenser and grabs a drink, then walks away and wonders why their heart is palpating. They walk up to the dispenser and decide on what flavor looks best, and only after they’ve left and no longer see the sign do they have reason to suspect that they’ve had caffeine.
Starbucks doesn’t need to on the basis that it is coffee - of course that’s going to have caffeine. It’s like putting a peanut warning on a bag of peanuts.
Red Bull and Monster call themselves energy drinks, and not lemonade. Was a bit of a problem when energy drinks were becoming popular, but now it is accepted that energy drinks have caffeine.
Even then you need to drink an entire pack of energy drinks to get the same caffeine levels as a single charged lemonade. That’s how much caffeine was in Charged Lemonades
but it had a label, didn’t it? one listing its contents? how is Panera Bread responsible for a person’s lack of self-control?
He already knew he had high blood pressure and to avoid highly-caffeinated foods/beverages. he purchased and consumed something three times without reading the label which would have informed him of the amount of caffeine it contained. How is it Panera Bread’s fault that he neglected to do that and consumed the beverage anyway?
And how many labels do you check for contents that a given food just plain does not contain? Because lemonades typically don’t have any caffeine in them.
Would you check the labels of a coffee in case it has alcohol? Would you check the labels of a fruit salad incase it has meat? Would you check the label of a lemonade for dangerous levels of caffeine?
You obviously wouldn’t, and as a result this could have easily fucked you up. Two cups of this, and you’d be having heart palpitations.
Because it is unreasonable to expect a lemonade to contain any caffeine, especially when the company failed to give notice of the fact.
What are you expecting him to do, read every label of literally every thing they consume, incase their packet of rice somehow contains caffeine?
Because they called it a lemonade, not a fucking energy drink, and gave no advanced notices that the item even has caffeine, let alone a borderline dangerous amount. And no, a tiny ass listing on the back of the retail cups is not enough.
Oh, and they offered and advertised free refills on a drink that they knew is crazy dangerous to consume more than a single cup of, even for healthy people.
How is any of that the fault of Panera bread? And why can’t you answer that simple question?
The amount in the lemonade was approved by the FDA, and it is every person‘s responsibility to check what they consume before they do so. The person had a pre-existing health condition, and that is not Panera bread‘s fault, either. 
You can’t just go around blaming everyone else for your own mistakes.
I did answer the question. Let me repeat incase you have trouble reading.
They called it lemonade, put it in a lineup among non caffeinated drinks (right next to their regular lemonade), put zero warning labels on and offered free refills on a drink that rode so close to the line of safe daily intakes that having two would cause serious problems even in healthy people.
They basically did everything they possibly could to hide this information. A single line in an ingredients is not sufficient warning because no reasonable consumer would check the ingredients of a lemonade for dangerous levels of caffeine.
Nope! FDA doesn’t actually regulate restaurants, and Charged Lemonade isn’t something that can be bought in store, only at Panera restaurants. FDA officially has no jurisdiction here:
https://www.fda.gov/food/food-industry/how-start-food-business
What you’ve done is mix fact with opinion to massively misrepresent the situation. You’re welcome to try that in a civil lawsuit, but if I’m on the jury, I would vote to dismiss the case. 
What did I mix, exactly? The only bit that is opinion was me stating they did everything they could to hide the information.
I’ve stated my case, and I find your counter argument insufficient. If you’re looking for some endless debate, you’re not gonna get one. The guy knew his health situation, drank a drink he knew better than to drink labeled charged lemonade. Panera bread is not responsible for a risk that the man took knowingly.
Sorry if that’s not good enough for you, but it’s going to have to be. Have a good night. 
Just throwing in my 2¢ here, your argument is devoid of any logic. You’re assuming he knew that those drinks had caffeine, even though the source specifically states the victim intentionally avoided caffeine due to his pre-existing condition. “Charged” isn’t a term that is typically used for drinks to indicate they have caffeine. Might as well call it zesty or smoky as neither of those terms imply any potential harm. It was negligent of Panera, most lawyers who have publicly commented or reviewed the claims agree that Panera will be found culpable or settle out of court. Being intentionally dense and abrasive isn’t an argument.
If you don’t actually have a fact based response, just say so.