Notice: Function _load_textdomain_just_in_time was called incorrectly. Translation loading for the insert-headers-and-footers domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6121
Starbucks must put cancer warning on California coffee: judge – News On Media

[ad_1]

(Reuters) – Starbucks Corp (SBUX.O) and other coffee companies must put a cancer warning label on coffee products sold in California, a Los Angeles judge ruled.

FILE PHOTO – A woman holds a Frappuccino at a Starbucks store inside the Tom Bradley terminal at LAX airport in Los Angeles, California, United States, October 27, 2015. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson

Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle said in a proposed decision Wednesday that Starbucks and other companies had failed to show that the threat from a chemical compound produced when roasting coffee was insignificant, court documents showed.

Starbucks and some 90 other defendants in the case have until April 10 to file objections. Other defendants include Green Mountain Coffee Roasters Inc, the J.M. Smucker Company and Kraft Foods Global, according to court documents.

Officials from Starbucks and other coffee sellers such as Dunkin’ Donuts (DNKN.O) and Peet’s did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The California-based Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT) first sued Starbucks and other companies in 2010 alleging they failed to provide warnings to consumers that the coffee they sold contained high levels of acrylamide, a toxic and carcinogenic chemical, court documents showed.

CERT argued that since acrylamide was classified as a carcinogen under California law, coffee sellers had to use warning labels to alert the millions of Californians drinking their products.

In the first phase of the trial, Starbucks and other defendants failed to show there was no “significant risk level” from the acrylamide in brewed coffee, court documents showed.

In the second phase of the trial concluded on Wednesday, the companies tried to establish that there was an acceptable “alternative significant risk level” of exposure to acrylamide, that consumers would stay within during a lifetime of coffee drinking.

Berle ruled that the companies failed to prove that there was such a level and therefore their products had to carry warning labels for acrylamide.

Reporting by Nate Raymond; additional reporting by Lisa Baertlein; Editing by Tom Brown and Richard Chang

[ad_2]

Source link