Michael Taylor, the FDA‘s deputy commissioner of foods, said that the only time the FDA explicitly approved the practice of adding caffeine to a food or drink was in the 1950s when it allowed the stimulant to be included in cola. The current prevalence of caffeine-filled foods is “beyond anything FDA envisioned,” Taylor said. “It is disturbing…We’re concerned about whether they have been adequately evaluated.”

The governing body is especially concerned when it comes to the effects of such foods on children; while kids aren’t likely to seek out a boring cup of joe, they may be more apt to grab a bag of jolt-inducing jelly beans. The American Academy of Pediatrics has linked caffeine to harmful effects on young people’s still-developing neurological and cardiovascular systems. So, while the FDA is already investigating the safety of energy drinks and energy shots (thanks to consumer reports of illness and death), the organization has decided to go a step further and look specifically at the foods’ effects on children.

Companies that manufacture and market caffeinated foods say that their products are intended for — and marketed to — adults. Wrigley, which recently released Alert Energy Gum (40 milligrams of caffeine per piece), pointed out that packages of the gum are labeled “for adult use only.” A spokesperson for the company said, “Millions of Americans consume caffeine responsibly and in moderation as part of their daily routines.”

While that may be, critics say it’s not enough for companies to say they are marketing the products to adults, who are capable of making more informed decisions about the amount of caffeine they consume, when the foods themselves are clearly attractive (and readily available) to children. In a letter to the FDA, Michael Jacobson, director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said of such foods: “One serving of any of these foods isn’t likely to harm anyone. The concern is that it will be increasingly easy to consume caffeine throughout the day, sometimes unwittingly, as companies add caffeine to candies, nuts, snacks and other foods.”

In acknowledgement that the consumption of one caffeinated item may not cause adverse effects, the probe will focus on the effects of added caffeine in its totality, and whether the increasing number of caffeinated products on the market might mean more adverse health effects for children.

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

One thing you almost certainly won’t hear Beyoncé discussing in 2013: the relationship between soft drinks and obesity. A certain other soda, on the other hand, just announced plans to address the issue directly.

This surprises us as much as anybody, but Pepsico‘s mortal enemy Coca-Cola just took a first step into the public health fray by creating a campaign designed to address America’s obesity epidemic–all in the company’s own best interests, of course.

continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

Not thrilled with the idea of your little tikes loading up on “jacked up” cracker jacks and bouncing off the walls? Fear not! PepsiCo (parent company of Cracker Jack makers Frito-Lay) assures us that it will only market the soon-to-be-released Cracker Jack’d Power Bites to adults. Not buying it? Neither is the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which charges that the planned snack violates federal food regulations.

In a letter to the Food and Drug Administration, CSPI argued that “Caffeine is generally recognized as safe only in cola-type beverages and only at concentrations of 0.02% or less (about 72 mg per 12 oz.).”

When asked about these allegations, a Frito-Lay spokesman told Ad Age that Power Bites will include “two flavors that will contain coffee, a natural source of caffeine, as an ingredient…We stand by the safety of all products in the Cracker Jack’d line, including those that contain coffee. It is worth pointing out the regulation referenced in CSPI’s letter to FDA speaks to caffeine–not coffee–and is not an exhaustive list of the safe uses of caffeine in foods and beverages.”

The FDA wasn’t the only organization to receive a strongly-worded note from CSPI.

continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

Now, in an effort to remind the public that over-consumption of soda leads less to joy and world peace and more to diabetes and obesity, Ad Man Alex Bogusky has partnered with the Center for Science in the Public Interest to create a decidedly disturbing parody of Coke’s polar bear ads. The below video, titled “The Real Bears,”, features many things viewers have come to expect from the classic ads, including fuzzy-faced creatures wearing scarves, a winter wonderland backdrop, and even an overly-cheerful song (in this case courtesy of Jason Mraz).

But unless we’re mistaken, we don’t remember insulin-filled syringes and references to erectile dysfunction in the original commercials. Let’s just put it this way — if you’d like your childhood memories of the Coca-Cola bears to remain sweet and untarnished, you’ll probably want to skip the video… continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

While the vast majority of consumers want to eat well, a recent survey conducted by iModerate Research Technologies confirms the fact that most don’t have enough information to make truly educated decisions regarding the food they buy—and that leaves them more vulnerable to dubious claims made by marketing teams and ad agencies.

In the eyes of the law, these questionable taglines might not mean much, and they may even qualify as “misleading.” But do they amount to bad PR practices or grounds for lawsuits? According to a recent story in The New York Times, a group of very successful litigators thinks they do—and they plan to raise a big stink about it.

continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

For weeks, theater owners have lobbied the Food and Drug Administration and congressional staff members for exemption from proposed rules requiring their snack stands to post the calories in popcorn, nachos, hot pretzels and other prepared foods. Today, the FDA is expected to announce its decision. (Update: As of March 30, it looks like a decision still hasn’t been made.)

Movie-concession disclosure rules fall under the same healthcare law provision that seeks to educate consumers by requiring chain restaurants to post the nutritional content of menu items. But the National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) fought for exclusion, contending that Congress didn’t specifically mention movie theaters when deliberating the measure last year.

continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.