These days practically every product one buys has a warning label of one level of severity or another. And some products have an extra label directed at customers in California -- those levels might actually tell us something we didn't know. But they've over done it to the point where their warnings are ignored.
It's not hard to find parody sites consisting of fake warning labels which use absurdity to spoof the warning labels we actually see.
And this recent news that a judge in California issued an order compelling Starbucks and other coffee makers to post warnings that coffee may contain a carcinogen called acrylamide could easily be mistaken for parody. See Starbucks, others must carry cancer warning in California, judge rules.
But note this: "The 'probable' or 'likely' carcinogen label is based on studies of animals given high levels of acrylamide in drinking water. But people and rodents absorb the chemical at different rates and metabolize it differently, so its relevance to human health is unknown." Saccharine and Alar come to mind.
With so many warnings, does anyone take them seriously any more? It's like the boy who cried wolf. Those self appointed saviors of humanity have squandered their credibility. And if they happen to stumble on a real threat they'll likely be ignored.
Meanwhile, one doesn't have to look too hard to find information about the health benefits of coffee. See, for example: Three cups of coffee a day clears out the arteries and protects against heart disease, reveals study.
Coffee has been around for generations, and people are living longer than ever. So which of these theories does a rational person base his/her consumption decision? I'll stick with coffee, thank you very much.
------
1:00 PM 4/2/2018
Comments