Lily Zheng - Final Thesis Draft

ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF MARKETING ENERGY DRINKS 1
ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF
MARKETING ENERGY DRINKS
An Honors Business Thesis
By
Lily Zheng
Dr. Shyam Sharma
WRT 301: Writing in the Discipline
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, NY

ABSTRACT
Energy drinks are known to be associated with a number of adverse health effects and
with the majority of its consumers being adolescents, it is important to question whether it is
ethical to market these drinks to young people. This thesis will explore the ethical tension that
arises when this issue is considered from the health, business, government and society’s
perspectives. It will analyze the advertising strategies of the industry; the advantages businesses
gain from advertising and government policies, as well as presenting several examples. It begins
with a brief analysis of advertising strategies, including commercials from Red Bull and
Monster. Then, it goes into an analysis of the ingredients and health effects of energy drinks,
which leads into a discussion on the ethical tensions and issues that arises by marketing to
adolescents, as well as industry gain. Next it will discuss the current government policies as well
as comparing them to other countries’ government policies and regulations on energy drink
advertising. The discussion on the government perspective will show the complexity of this issue
and show what society understands about this issue. It will conclude by arguing that the
government can only do so much and it is up to society to put enough pressure on the
government for any change to take place.

Table of Contents
ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................................2
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................4
CHAPTER TWO: THE ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF MARKETING ENERGY DRINKS ...7
Problematic Techniques of Advertising to Adolescents..............................................................7
What Energy Drinks Contain and Its Underlying Health Risks ................................................12
Perception of Energy Drinks Compared to Soda, Tobacco and Liquor ....................................15
The Business Perspective...........................................................................................................19
CHAPTER THREE: THE INFLUENCE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND PUBLIC
OPINION ON THE ENERGY DRINK INDUSTRY...................................................................21
Current Regulations ...................................................................................................................22
Regulation by Other Governments ............................................................................................27
Society, Education and Media ...................................................................................................29
CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION .............................................................................................33
REFERENCES..............................................................................................................................35

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Over the last few years, energy drinks have gained tremendous popularity, with their top
consumers being adolescents. However, with the increase in popularity comes the increase in
research that shows that these energy drinks are associated with a number of adverse health
effects. The continued marketing efforts of these energy drinks question the ethical responsibility
of these businesses, along with the government’s regulations on such beverages. There have been
many reports sent to the FDA urging them to investigate the health risks of energy drinks as well
as cases where people have died due to these beverages. However, the FDA has not come to a
conclusion about these beverages and companies deny any link between the supposed “risks”
with their product. Despite all the research conducted by experts, both the government and the
industry continue to ignore these studies. This brings up the issue of social liability. The
government has the duty to protect public health, but they are overlooking this issue.
The energy drink industry has been growing and it will only continue to grow, but how
can they operate with a conscious mind knowing that in exchange for money, they are selling
their products to consumers who do not know about the possible risks they are paying for. Even
more so, these companies are directly targeting their advertisements towards youth. The youth
face the most risk when consuming these products, because studies have shown it can cause
brain damage, heart palpitations and tremors. Because they are so young, the high levels of
caffeine in these drinks affect them the most. Given that companies can lawfully market and sell
their products based on free will, how ethical is it that they are more focused on marketing to the
youth? This thesis will discuss the business and government perspectives on energy drink
regulations by looking into business practices and how it affects society as a whole. This thesis

will pose alternate arguments for both sides discussing the ethicality of everything as well as
recommendations on how to solve these issues.
Chapter two will discuss the overall industry of the energy drink market. I will look into
the problematic techniques of advertising to children, specifically the types of advertisements
illustrated and how these advertisements appeal to adolescents. Furthermore, this chapter will
look into the ingredients contained in these energy drinks, the amount and their effects on the
health. The presumption that energy drinks will be beneficial to athletes will be discussed as
well. Additionally, this chapter will examine the comparisons with soda, tobacco and liquor and
how the safety, perception and regulation of these products are similar and dissimilar to energy
drinks. Lastly, with the introduction of “Youth Marketing”, I will discuss why these companies
choose to market to adolescents and why they are secretly marketing to adolescents despite
pledging the opposite.
Chapter three will look into the government’s perspective – their current regulations as
well as how governments in other countries are regulating these products. This chapter will
discuss the FDA’s “solution” of posting a “guideline” instead of a real strategy to regulate
energy drinks. I will examine the FDA’s ignorance on reports and urges from experts to
investigate these reports. In addition, I will present two cases where teenagers have died as a
result of consuming an excess amount of energy drinks and discuss how too much of anything
can be bad for you as a counter-argument. Additionally, this chapter will counter-argue the
regulation on energy drinks and how it will affect the industry. On the same note, I will discuss
how the media, society and education is trying to shed light on this topic to spread awareness of
the potential harm of these. The conclusion will summarize the main ideas, highlight the ethical

issues that are at hand. What is the “right” thing to do? Where can we go from here? This thesis
will lay down the basis and the perspectives from different sides.

CHAPTER TWO: THE ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS OF MARKETING ENERGY
DRINKS
This chapter will analyze the marketing techniques of energy drinks, which will lead to a
discussion of the underlying issues of morality, responsibility, and honesty of these
advertisements in addition to the comparison of energy drinks to tobacco, alcohol and soda.
Additionally, I will analyze the ingredients in these drinks and discuss the known health risks
that are associated with energy drinks. This will allow us to understand the ethical implications
of marketing these energy drinks to adolescents and it will give an overview of the flaws of the
industry.
Problematic Techniques of Advertising to Adolescents
The energy drink industry has gained a huge young consumer base due to their clever
advertising campaigns to attract adolescents. Big companies such as Red Bull and Monster
Energy mostly advertise their products through commercials, which many air on adolescent-
friendly channels such as MTV, Fuse and BET (Sifferlin, 2015; para. 2). These companies are
well aware of the reports of health risks associated with their beverages, but do not stop their
marketing efforts. This poses an issue of honesty because these companies claim that they are not
marketing to adolescents, but by airing commercials on such channels, they are directly targeting
adolescents.
Besides the commercials being aired on adolescent-friendly channels, the content is
appealing to youth, which further stretches the ethical issue of morality. At a young age,
adolescents are extremely vulnerable to the advertisements they see. Even a simple commercial
about a toy can convince them that they need to buy that toy. Using marketing techniques that
directly appeal to the vulnerability of adolescents is dangerous. Kids are not able to make an

informed decision on their own at such a young age, so they can easily make the wrong inference
about a product. Companies use that to their advantage to try to gain a young consumer base.
Thus, this leads to kids consuming products that are dangerous to their health because they do
not know any better.
Energy drink companies market their products to youths with a disregard for the health
risks that their drinks may cause these consumers. As an example of such marketing, Red Bull
famously uses cartoons in their commercials and the end of each commercial is followed by
either one of these slogans, “Red Bull gives you wings” or “No Red Bull. No wings.” In each
commercial, there is a comedic aspect aimed at the viewer. Red Bull uses situations that
everyone is familiar with in their commercials. The purpose of this is to create something
viewers can relate to and something that viewers of all ages can remember. Some of these
commercials also promote that Red Bull can help the consumer with concentration and strength,
with a student worrying about his exam the next day and a giraffe defeating an alligator in a
fight. The images below are from one of their commercials featuring a superhero (Siccameht,
2010).
Figure 1. Red Bull Commercial
In that commercial, the superhero hears a cry for help and he goes into his refrigerator to get a
Red Bull to drink. However, both cans are empty and then he throws the cans at a garbage can

already full of Red Bull cans. In the next scene, he closes his window and sighs, thus ending the
commercial with “No Red Bull. No wings” (Siccameht, 2010). This commercial implies that Red
Bull helps make a superhero what he is. What is stopping kids from thinking the same thing?
This commercial applies the three things that appeal to kids: cartoons, superheroes and humor.
So, even if they claim that they are not marketing to adolescents, it does not appear that way.
The advertising tactics used by energy drink companies are not only irresponsible but
also widespread because they are used by all the companies in the market, which sets a false
sense of belief that it is ethical to do. This false sense of ethicality is due to the norm that these
advertising tactics have set. This norm allows companies to believe that it is okay to advertise to
adolescents through adolescent-friendly channels and associating their products with their
interests. Because so many companies have been using the same tactics for so long, such as
marketing to adolescents by appealing to their interests, it lets other companies believe that it is
okay to do the same. Soon, everyone is doing the same thing, which creates a norm among the
advertising of these products. For instance, both Red Bull and Monster have been featuring
extreme sports in their recent commercials. Such sports include, racing, snowboarding,
skateboarding and motor biking. These are all sports that appeal to the younger generations.
These companies have been trying to appeal to adolescents on every level in order to integrate
themselves into their everyday lives.
By appealing to adolescents on every level, these companies are targeting the common
interests of adolescents. For instance, Monster Energy’s commercials themes consist of gaming,
music, extreme sports and girls wearing little clothes, known as “Monster girls.” All these
themes can easily be relatable and appealing to teenage boys. In fact, other industries, such as the
liquor industry use models to market their products to men specifically. In essence, this opens the

door to energy drink companies to want to do the same thing in order to appeal to that type of
audience. This goes back to the marketing norm within the advertising industry. With energy
drink companies sponsoring these extreme sports and featuring them in their commercials,
adolescents can easily misunderstand that such drinks will give them enough energy to
participate in these sports. However, these adolescents are all unaware of the underlying health
risks that are associated with consuming energy drinks. It is also well known among health
experts that consuming an energy drink prior to a sports activity can cause dehydration, which is
bad for the body during a physical activity (Schumaker, 2014; para. 6). Therefore, we must
question the morality of such marketing techniques, because many companies use the same
tactics to market harmful drinks. Despite the companies’ knowledge of the effects their drinks
may have, they still continue to apply these marketing tactics to gain and retain a consumer base;
and that is not moral.
Subsequently, Monster takes the issue of morality a step further by creating a “club”
targeted towards adolescents with interests in extreme sports. As a result, this leads to a bigger
morality issue. Monster has a program called “Monster Army” and it is an athlete development
program for ages 13-21 in sports such as skating, snowboarding, and biking. On their website,
there are profiles of people as young as 13 posing with the drink in their respective sport.
However, there are some registered profiles with kids younger than 13 even though Monster
claims any “army” member must be at least 13 (Monster Army, 2015). The company tries to
make their brand as involved with adolescents as possible, especially naming their program
something “cool”. From a business perspective, this is a great technique to reach out to youths
and make them connect to the brand at a different level. However, companies should often take a
step back and question if it is right or wrong. This is encouraging teenagers to partake in these

dangerous sports with a can of Monster in their hand, which speaks to the responsibility of this
company.
As a result of these marketing techniques, adolescents believe that it is okay to consume
energy drinks while playing sports. It is wrong to have them draw that kind of conclusion
without being given the proper information about these products, which speaks to the
vulnerability of adolescents. This can make them want to buy into these brand more when there
is research that shows that energy drinks are bad when combined with extreme sports because it
can dehydrate the person. It is immoral to associate and market these drinks with such sports.
Monster is promoting their product as something that one should drink before playing the sport
for more energy despite that dehydration is detrimental to a person, especially an athlete
(Schumaker, 2014). Thus, it is immoral because not only are the side effects of consuming
energy drinks while playing sports bad, these companies try to make it appear that it is good for
athletes. These companies are marketing their products with a false perception - they want the
consumers to believe that it is good, but consumers are unknowingly purchasing something
potentially harmful.
With all of these factors in mind, it is obvious to see why and how these energy drinks
are appealing to adolescents and why they would continue to buy these products. But these
adolescents are not aware of all of these health risks that come with consuming these drinks.
Adolescents are vulnerable to these advertisements, because they do not know any better. These
companies say they are not marketing their drinks to kids, but their marketing campaigns say
otherwise. It is wrong for them to continue to use these marketing tactics that obviously appeal to
adolescents. This advertising norm that has been created and continue to be implemented is
unjust, because they are sneaky tactics used to integrate themselves into the everyday lives of

these consumers. And this leads to the ultimate question - can consumers really trust these
companies?
What Energy Drinks Contain and Its Underlying Health Risks
Marketing energy drinks is an ethically significant issue because of health risks
associated with these drinks. It is a company’s duty and moral obligation to make sure that their
drinks do not harm the consumers. By doing so, they need to make sure that their ingredients do
not have any associated health risks and that it is safe to put out to the public. However, from a
health perspective, research conducted on these energy drinks prove that these drinks are not as
safe as these companies claim.This questions the responsibility of these companies for ensuring
the safety of their products and ensuring the safety of the consumers’ health.
First, let us examine these ingredients, its purpose and the adverse effects. The amount of
caffeine in energy drinks is almost three times the amount in cola and energy shots have five
times the amount. Besides caffeine, the most common ingredients in energy drinks are guarana,
taurine, ginseng, L-Carnitine and yohimbine (Seifert, Schaechter, Hershorin & Lipshultz, 2011;
p. 514). Guarana is a plant from South America that contains a lot of caffeine. Each gram of
guarana contains about 40 to 80mg of caffeine and it is generally considered safe by the FDA.
Taurine is an amino acid that can be found in the central nervous system and it is also considered
safe by the FDA (Seifert et al., 2011; p. 514).
On the other hand, not all of the ingredients are considered safe by the FDA and this
alone should already raise some eyebrows. L-carnitine is another amino acid and its function is
to promote fat metabolism and increase endurance. However, l-carnitine in abundance can cause
nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and in some cases, it causes seizures in patients who had no prior
history of seizures or had any known diseases. Ginseng is another popular ingredient that is

usually found in energy drinks. It is a herb from east Asia and its purpose is to improve physical
performance. However, ginseng could cause ginseng toxicity, which symptoms may include
diarrhea, vaginal bleeding, headache, vertigo and insomnia. The last common ingredient is
Yohimbine, a herbal supplement added to increase energy, metabolism and stamina. The adverse
effects of Yohimbine are hypertension and normal doses, hypotension at high doses and death
(Seifert et al., 2011; p. 514). The fact that energy drink companies do not have to reveal how
much caffeine each drink contains makes these effects more dangerous if they are unknown to
the consumer. Therefore, this is a moral issue regarding public safety and these companies’
obligations to protect the public.
On the other hand, the FDA has not evaluated these ingredients for safety, because these
ingredients are usually plant and herbal extracts and some companies can label their products as
dietary supplements. In which case, the FDA cannot regulate dietary supplements (Schumaker,
2014; para. 7). It is a dirty and dishonest tactic that some companies use to label their products as
dietary supplements in order to avoid FDA regulation. It is known that an overdose of caffeine
cannot be beneficial to the consumer’s health, however it is not known exactly how bad a
combination of all these ingredients are. According to Schumaker (2014):
...Without this research, it isn’t clear what effect the combination of plant-based
substances (guarana, ginkgo biloba and ginseng are common ingredients) have on the
body. Many people underestimate the power of caffeine from natural sources and aren’t
aware that plant extracts like guarana have caffeine-like effects. (para. 7)
Because these ingredients have not had sufficient research done on them, there is still a lot to be
known about these ingredients. However, what is known is the effect too much caffeine has on
adolescents. Experts recommend no more than 100mg of caffeine a day for adolescents, but

some drinks contain more than that per can. Pediatrics conducted experiments on adolescents
who have consumed energy drinks and they reported to have discovered that caffeine can
significantly lower heart rates and high doses of caffeine can exacerbate cardiac conditions
(Seifert et al., 2015; p. 520). The consumption of energy drinks is harmful to adolescents and
these facts can not be ignored.
Monster, Red Bull and a few other energy drink companies advertise their drinks
alongside extreme sports, but studies on athletes have found that energy drinks can cause
dehydration and the presence of taurine can cause a stroke. Regular sports drinks, like Gatorade
help replenish electrolytes to prevent dehydration, but energy drinks do the opposite (Schumaker,
2014, para. 6). This questions the integrity of the companies and their social liability they have
towards society.
There is a common misconception with sports drinks and energy drinks and companies
use this misconception to their advantage. Many believe that energy drinks work like sports
drinks - with the added benefit of giving the consumer energy, something that sports drinks do
not have. This is why companies market their energy drinks with extreme sports, because they
want the consumer to believe that the drink will not only give them energy, it will be beneficial
to the body. However, sports drinks like Gatorade, are made to replenish fluids in the body lost
through sweating from completing a physical activity. It keeps the body’s balance of fluids at the
proper level while restoring carbohydrates and helping rebuild muscles (“Energy and sports,”
2015; para. 5). All in all, sports drinks are beneficial to the body and they should be consumed
by athletes after intense physical activities - such as extreme sports. On the other hand, energy
drinks contain no such benefits that sports drinks contain. They are consumed for energy, but
once that energy wears off, so does the person’s energy. As mentioned before, energy drinks

dehydrate the body, which cannot be good for someone who competes in extreme sports. The
fact that some companies still market their drinks alongside extreme sports taps into the integrity
of such companies.
Perception of Energy Drinks Compared to Soda, Tobacco and Liquor
No one is warning the public about the dangers of energy drinks. Nobody is willing to
take on the duty of protecting the public’s health and regulating the safety of these beverages.
Industry giants like tobacco has been marketed to adolescents for a long time until the
government took action and prohibited them from doing it. They marketed their cigarettes to
adolescents before the dangers of smoking were made known to the public. According to John
W. Richards, Jr, Joe B. Tye & Paul M. Fischer, The Cigarette Advertising Code was developed
in 1964 following public complaints about advertising directed towards youths (Richards et. al,
1966; p. 295). This new law prohibited advertising directed to youths. The public complaints
came after Smoking and Health: Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the
United States, published the same year, which contained over 7,000 scientific articles that linked
tobacco use with cancer. According to Richards et al. (1966), “Before 1964, competing and
misleading health claims saturated cigarette marketing” (p. 297). That report was a wake up call
to society that cigarettes were harmful. All the advertising prior to that claimed that cigarettes
were good, but once the dangers of smoking were made aware, the public took action. Within the
same year that the health reports were published, the Cigarette Advertising Code was also
established, which goes to show how strong public opinion can be and its influence on the
government.
Because of public demand and complaint, the government took action and issued a law
that banned the advertising of tobacco to children. The public took social responsibility into their

own hands in order to protect the youths. Perhaps the best way to stop big businesses from
marketing energy drinks to youths is the same push from the public to demand change from the
government. However, because the majority of the public is not aware of the dangers of energy
drinks, the government has yet to take any action. In fact, many critics have compared tobacco to
energy drinks due to its similarities in terms of marketing and that both have associated health
risks. Let us take a look into the similarities of their marketing techniques. The images below
show the product placement of Winston cigarettes in a cigarette commercial featuring the
popular kids cartoon show, The Flintstones (Psychotronic42, 2007).
Figure 2. Flintstones Cigarette Commercial
In these commercials, these characters would be talking about how good these cigarettes
were and how much they enjoyed it. The company employed this marketing technique to appeal
to children at that time, just like how Red Bull also uses cartoons. From this commercial,
adolescents would want to buy a pack of these cigarettes because their favorite cartoon
characters were smoking it in this commercial. It would influence them and make them believe
that it was cool. It is easy to see that history is repeating itself with the energy drink industry.
According to Koseff (2013):
(Senator) Blumenthal likened the strategy to tobacco companies’ use of mascots, such as
cowboys and cartoon characters that young people might find cool. For energy drink

companies “to deny that they’re appealing to children, it’s more than a little
disingenuous,” he said. (para. 17)
Just like the tobacco companies, energy drink companies are trying to get customers while they
are young in order to convert them into lifetime customers. Although, some speculations claim
that the tobacco industry tries to get younger customers because they are aware that their product
is killing their older customers.
Although energy drinks are nowhere as bad as the health issues that come with smoking
tobacco, it is uncanny how similar their marketing techniques are. Both products pose some sort
of risk yet companies still market their products to adolescents, which raise an ethical issue. It
took years before the government took action and prohibited the tobacco industry from
marketing to adolescents and to implement warning labels on their products.
Unlike energy drinks, sodas do not affect the health as much, however both their
marketing strategies are the same. The FDA has regulations on the caffeine content in soda
unlike energy drinks. They are not allowed more than 70mg of caffeine per 12oz serving (Seifert
et al., 2015; p. 520). The soda industry has also “publicly” stopped marketing to adolescents, but
it does not stop them from indiscreetly appealing to kids.
There are many advertisements and product placements for soda on TV channels,
especially on adolescent-friendly channels mentioned earlier. These soda companies also sponsor
numerous sporting, concert, and cultural events. In addition, many celebrities appear on these
advertisements. For example, in the image below, it shows a popular teen artist, Taylor Swift
posing in a Diet Coke advertisement. The ad writes “The perfect duet”, which in this case is
talking about Taylor Swift and the soda (Hom, 2015). Whatever adolescents do, whether it is
watching their favorite show, going to a sports game or just going out, they are bound to come

across a soda advertisement. They rely on immersing their product in a consumer’s everyday life
to gain a following.
Figure 3. Taylor Swift’s Diet Coke Ad
Alcohol is also marketed to appeal to adolescents – with a lot of their advertisements
featuring scantily clad women and attractive men. Not only does this appeal to older men and
women, it appeals to teenagers. In fact, alcohol and energy drinks are a dangerous mixture, but it
is a popular mixture in college parties. The caffeine in energy drinks can hide the effects of
alcohol, which encourages people to drink more (Miller, 2014; para. 16). However, the caffeine
also exacerbates the effect of alcohol, so slowly but surely, excess consumption can lead to a
deadly effect. Besides being drunk, the adverse effects of energy drinks are combined with the
adverse effects of alcohol, such as alcohol poisoning.
Despite all the similarities with marketing, there is a big main difference: adolescents are
aware that tobacco, alcohol, and soda are bad. In school they are taught that smoking and
drinking can kill and that soda can lead to obesity. Parents also tell their kids the same thing. But
no one is warning them about energy drinks. It is also a parent’s duty to protect their child from
any harm that may be caused to them, but how are they able to do that when even the parents are
not aware of the harm that energy drinks cause? And that is because the majority of the public

are unaware of the health effects of energy drinks. In order for there to be changes, there needs to
be awareness. Tobacco, alcohol and soda were around long enough for people to discover its
negative effects and spread awareness, but energy drinks have not been around for that long. The
issues of energy drinks are mostly affecting the younger generation, the future of this country
and yet the biggest consumers of these drinks are the same people. The government has a duty to
protect the young and they are able to do so much more to help them – but why are they not?
The Business Perspective
This section will discuss why companies market to children, the argument and the
critique behind it. It will allow for us to understand the business perspective of these ethical
issues of marketing energy drinks to adolescents.
First, it is imperative to understand a business’ marketing strategy, why they choose to
use that strategy and the ethical issues involved with this strategy. Energy drink companies
employ a strategy called youth marketing. Youth marketing is the marketing effort towards
younger people. Advertisement campaigns are targeted specifically for them, such as the
commercials previously mentioned. Youth marketing is not specifically limited to one channel; it
can take place on the TV, in print or online. Through youth marketing, companies also sponsor
athletes, celebrities or sports teams in order to place themselves into the youth culture (“Youth
Marketing,” n.d; para. 2). Companies try to make themselves relevant among youths so that in
turn, youths will purchase their products to promote their own personal brand.
Likewise, companies see adolescents as “trend setters” from their sweaters to their socks,
which means that whatever products are popular among adolescents, others will view it as “cool”
and more consumers will follow suit. Companies see adolescents as valuable consumers because
they can also influence their friends and family’s purchasing decisions. If the family goes

grocery shopping and the child puts a pack of energy drinks in the shopping cart, then there will
be a chance that family members will eventually try the beverage and buy more if they like it.
Additionally, this also creates brand loyalty, which is important to companies. (Olsen, 2015)
wrote that in a news report published by three senators who aims to protect youths from the risks
of energy drinks, they noted, “Unfortunately, as long as early development of brand loyalty is
seen as a competitive advantage, energy drink companies will continue with the practice of
marketing to teens in the absence of regulation that prohibits it” (para. 2). Companies view the
adolescent as paramount to their current and future success as a business and if they are able to
gain a following at a young age, they will be able to keep them as consumers for a long time. In
this case, companies may not care about any ethical issues because they want to create a big and
loyal consumer base to earn more profits.
In contrast, with all the studies, report and knowledge of the adverse health effects of
energy drinks, is the continuation of marketing these drinks to adolescents socially responsible?
Well according to Time magazine, “They also have voluntarily pledged not to market these
products to children or sell them in K-12 schools” (Olson, 2015; para. 3). Then why are they
still doing it? It seems that companies have fully become aware of the potential harm yet they
would not publicly admit to these claims. They chose to maximize profit instead of their moral
obligation to protect their consumers. They forgo honesty and consumer trust to gain profit.
Instead, they say that they would not market to adolescents to make their image look good. But
that is not stopping them from indiscreetly doing so especially since there are no laws that
prohibits it. If we cannot trust their word, how can we trust their product?

CHAPTER THREE: THE INFLUENCE OF GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND
PUBLIC OPINION ON THE ENERGY DRINK INDUSTRY
This chapter will continue to discuss the ethical implications of marketing energy drinks
from three different perspectives: the business in relation to current regulation, the government
and its role in that regulation, and society with a focus on how education and media shapes and
influences business practices and government regulation. As I have previously discussed the
business perspective on this issue in Chapter 2, let us look at the government’s and society’s
perspectives. First, by looking into the current regulations on energy drinks, I can see if the
government is taking responsibility in protecting the people’s health. The lack of regulations will
indicate that there is a problem that needs to be solved. Second, I will also discuss the
government’s perspective on reports claiming that energy drinks are harmful. In doing so, I will
finally look into the FDA’s regulations for beverages and its proposed solution to regulating
energy drinks to determine whether these are the right solutions. As a result, it will show the
FDA’s failed attempt to handle the allegations regarding energy drinks and associated health
risks.
Additionally, to further understand how the government perceives energy drinks, I will
examine energy drink regulations in other countries as a comparison to those in the United
States. As a result, this will show that other governments have taken the initiative, the
responsibility and the preventive measures to ensure that the health of their country. From there,
we will be able to see that proper energy drink regulation is possible and the reports of health
risks associated with energy drinks should not be ignored. Finally, this chapter will discuss how
society and the media are trying to expose the unjust nature of energy drink companies by

educating the public about the dangers of energy drinks. Thus, this will allow us to fully
understand all sides of the argument and the ethical issues behind it.
Current Regulations
First, I will discuss the currently regulations the FDA has on energy drinks compared to
those on soda drinks. This will show the lack of effort there are in regulating energy drinks.
Currently, there are no regulations for energy drinks, which put energy drink consumers’ health
at risk. Manufacturers are not required to limit the amount of caffeine in their drinks nor are they
required to disclose how much caffeine is in a can on their labels. There are also no requirements
for testing, warning labels or restrictions on who can buy these drinks. Sodas on the other hand,
are required by the FDA to have no more than 71 milligrams of caffeine per 12 ounce of soda
(Seifert et al., 2015; p. 520). Caffeine content in soda is limited because there is a widespread of
consumers who drink it, especially kids. However, soda companies have a distinct responsibly to
proper label their products because their products have a steady affect on the health. The more
soda someone consumes over time, the more prone they are to obesity, but that is due to its sugar
content and the frequency in which it is consumed. In contrast, energy drinks have five times the
amount of caffeine that soda contains, which is scary because the consumer has a higher chance
of facing health issues related to caffeine. Not only that, caffeine has an immediate effect on the
body, which makes it more dangerous. Taking that into account, the government should feel that
it is their duty to have some kind of regulation set in place for energy drinks. The lack of
regulation for energy drinks compared to soda shows the lack of responsibility and the neglect
the government has shown for energy drinks.
Since there are no government regulations for energy drinks, this leaves manufacturers to
“self-regulate” and “self-determine” the safety of these energy drinks. This gives them free

autonomy to make their own rules and makes it unfair for soda companies who are constrained
by specific rules. In order words, manufacturers are responsible for judging the safety of their
products. Energy drink companies have taken it upon themselves, after facing a lot of criticism,
to agree to the labeling and advertising guidelines set by the American Beverage Association
(ABA), the largest lobbying group for beverage companies (Villafranco, 2013; para. 3). Under
these guidelines, they agreed to label the caffeine content, refrain from adding alcohol into their
drinks and adding the warning label: “Not intended/recommended for children, pregnant or
nursing women and/or persons sensitive to caffeine.” They also agreed to not sell their products
in school or as sports drinks (Villafranco, 2013; para. 3). However, these moves are insufficient,
because they practice bad business by discretely marketing to adolescents (ex: Monster Army).
Red Bull has also taken this practice of bad business ethics to another level and put a daily
consumption recommendation label on their drinks. Since the government is not regulating these
drinks, it may seem good in the public’s eyes that these companies are self-regulating their
drinks. So not only are they selling these products, they are selling the idea that they have
integrity.
On the contrary, some of the energy drinks have been FDA approved, but despite being
approved, these drinks still are not required to disclose the amount caffeine and other ingredients
it contains. These companies are being dishonest to the public about their product because they
have not disclosed all the information. Ruth Litchfield, an associate professor in the Department
of Food Science and Human Nutrition at Iowa State University noted,“That’s the biggest
problem I see: It’s not required on the label, and in most cases, they are not disclosing the total
stimulant dose in the product for people to make an educated decision” (Miller, 2015; para. 3).

Even though these products may have warning labels and the caffeine content on their drinks, it
does not show that these companies are following any regulations, because there really is not
any. These “self-regulations” are not enough and by saying they are “FDA-approved” still does
not make these products any safer than it really is. It is deceitful to the public, because it is
masking its health risks under labels and “approvals” to make it seem like they are safe
beverages when underneath that mask, it is not. Which is why this makes the continuation of
marketing energy drinks to adolescents is dishonest, because they believe they are consuming
something harm-free when they are not.
So, what determines the safety of additives in foods and beverages? The FDA has a list
that includes all the ingredients that are added to food that the FDA has approved as food
additives or affirmed as GRAS, generally recognized as safe (Beyranvand, 2013; p. 888).
Unfortunately, this list has been highly scrutinized as containing ingredients that raise serious
health concerns, such as trans fat oils. There also has been a lot of issues surrounding the safety
of salt and sugar. However, these ingredients still remain on the list because the FDA has failed
to address these concerns. Which goes to show that the FDA has a history of failure to address
public concerns about food additives.
With some of the ingredients in the GRAS list associated with health concerns, this
questions the validity of the list. The GRAS requirement came under the Food Additives
Amendment of 1958, which took almost two decades for congress to pass (Beyranvand, 2013; p.
888). Under this amendment, all additives are presumed unsafe until they are tested and
approved by the FDA to be GRAS. To be considered GRAS, an ingredient must be “recognized
among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to evaluate its safety...to be safe
under the conditions of its intended use” (Beyranvand, 2013; p.889). Why is this important?

Caffeine and guarana are GRAS. However, it does not take into account the maximum amount of
these ingredients before they can be recognized as unsafe. Even though it is GRAS approved, it
is still unregulated by the FDA, which makes it a concern. Another scrutiny of GRAS is that a
substance can be GRAS as long as it was commonly used in foods and marketed prior to 1958.
So, there was no rigorous “scientific testing” to make sure that it was safe, it was just assumed to
be safe because it was widely consumed. That cannot be a good reason to approve an ingredient
as safe because science and research was not as advanced as it is now. The whole validity of the
list comes into question due to its lack of testing. The FDA needs to re-evaluate these ingredients
that they are considering “safe” as new research comes out about such ingredients.
It can be agreed on that the ingredients on energy drinks should be tested for safety, but is
that morally okay? It would be a challenge for experts to prove the safety of energy drinks due to
the circumstances of such research experiments. Sifferlin (2015), argues that:
It would be considered unethical to design a study in which scientists wait to see if
people have dangerous reactions to a product. Energy drinks are also hard to study
because their ingredient blends are often proprietary, so scientists don’t know exactly
how much of a given ingredient is in the can or bottle. (para. 8)
Much of the known research and studies have been based on the studies of these individual
ingredients and the health reports and deaths of people who had a relation to energy drinks.
There is not enough research about the combination of these ingredients, especially because
these companies do not disclose the amount of each ingredient. So, it is immoral to conduct a
study where participants consume ingredients of unknown amounts and wait for them to exhibit
signs of health issues. Therefore, it is hard to really declare that energy drinks are harmful when

it is hard to come up with definitive proof. We can only rely on and trust the reports of those who
have exhibited health conditions associated with consuming energy drinks.
How is the FDA handling these reports and allegations? The FDA has acknowledged
these reports about the adverse health effects of energy drinks and claim to be investigating it,
but they have yet to provide their conclusion on it. Instead, they released their “current thinking”
about whether a beverage might not be a food or a drug, but a liquid dietary supplement. The
FDA calls it a “guidance” for the high volumes of unregulated dietary supplements (Flynn, 2014;
para. 2). This “guidance” is there to help people distinguish between an energy drink and a
“health supplement”, but that is not enough. So, the FDA “acknowledges” these reports and they
are “investigating” said reports, but the best they could do was put out a guidance? It is not
enough to simply put out a guidance, because that does not stop companies from marketing these
drinks to adolescents nor does it stop adolescents from consuming such drinks. It appears that the
FDA may be avoiding having to conduct thorough research into energy drink and having to
impose strict regulations on it. They are avoiding their social responsibility and moral obligation
to protect society’s health.
On the contrary, it is important to note that although regulations on energy drinks will be
beneficial, it may be damaging to the energy drink industry. Suppose the FDA puts restrictions
on energy drinks, the public will figure out that the FDA imposed such regulations because
energy drinks are bad. Society will learn about the health effects of such drinks and then they
will wonder why the government has not taken any action even though they knew about it for a
long time. This will create a lack of trust between the public and the industry as well as the
public and the government. The public will be furious that these companies had sneaky tactics
and marketed these drinks to adolescents even though they are aware that their products could

potentially be bad for teenagers. Hank Schultz, the managing editor of Functional Ingredients
magazine, and Todd Runestad, the editor in chief and science editor of the magazine argues that
(Schultz & Runestad, 2012):
The negative attention it brings to the industry will likely create unfounded concern about
dietary supplement safety among consumers, despite the fact that the industry has a
sterling safety record and that adverse events caused directly by dietary supplements are
rare. (para. 1)
They are referencing to the bill that Senator Dick Durbin wants to pass to employ new
regulations on food and beverages industry. Even if this bill does not pass, he will have garnered
enough attention and headlines on this topic and issue, which will bring negative press to these
companies. Thus, this leaves us in a difficult crossroads in deciding what is the best thing to do.
Regulation by Other Governments
Discussing other governmental regulations may help us understand what the United
States is lacking in action. It will allow us to see how other governments have taken the initiative
to be more socially responsible. Unlike the United States, many countries have taken action on
regulating energy drinks. In 2014, Lithuania became the first European country to ban energy
drinks to anyone under 18 (Thrastardottir, 2014; para. 1). This ban came after the Baltic state
realized that energy drinks posed risks for adolescents from numerous reports. Almantas
Kranauskas, Lithuania’s health ministry official said, “Most countries only have
recommendations. We are the first” (Thrastordottir, 2014; para. 3). This shows that the
government is willing to take action and protect the youth from the adverse health risks. They are
aware that they have the responsibility to protect their population’s health. When they mentioned
that other countries only have recommendations, they may be referring to the FDA’s “current

thinking” on energy drinks. Lithuania is aware that other countries are not doing their part in
taking preventive measures and they are proud that they are the first country to do so. The
government did not wave away the research and set up “guidelines”, they took action. Perhaps
the United States should do the same.
Furthermore, other countries have imposed similar bans and restrictions. Denmark has
banned energy drinks entirely and Sweden banned the sales of energy drinks to children under 15
years old. Sweden also imposed warning labels about consuming a lot of caffeine after working
out and mixing energy drinks with alcohol on energy drinks (Seifert et al., 2015; p. 521). Saudi
Arabia has banned all advertising on energy drinks and has limited their distribution of these
drinks. In addition, energy drink companies are banned from sponsoring any sporting, social or
cultural events (Bouckley, 2014; para. 5). This decision was again, followed after the state had a
meeting discussing the “adverse effects of energy drinks.” Saudi Arabia has prevented energy
drink companies from reaching out to adolescents through any form of marketing techniques and
this really puts a limit on the energy drink industry, because Saudi Arabia was a strong region for
growth prior to this ban. Saudi Arabia did not care that their new regulations will hurt the energy
drink industry. They care more about their moral obligation to society.
These countries that were previously named are just a few out of many that have
restrictions or are in the process of reviewing energy drink’s safety. All of those countries have
realized the risks of energy drinks and they have reacted to this realization. The United State’s
population exceeds all of those countries’, so the U.S is facing more damage if energy drinks are
continuing to be consumed. All of these countries have taken some sort of preventive measures
to ensure that adolescents do not consume energy drinks. It is about time that the United States
do the same, because they have the moral obligation to.

Society, Education and Media
The media plays an enormous role in society, because they are responsible for informing
the public. Without the media, the public would not be educated on the dangers of energy drinks.
In the age of digital media, it is easy and fast to reach a wide range of audience. Not a lot of
people are aware of the adverse health effects caused by energy drinks. However, a segment of
the media does try to shed some light onto this subject and spread awareness. Society as a whole
is taking social responsibility into their own hands to educate the public. An educated society
will be able to make the right decisions. For instance, the media has been writing more articles
about the effects of energy drinks in order to warn people. Besides that, the media has also
reported on cases where teenagers have died as a result from energy drink consumption in order
to garner attention. Alex Morris was 19 years old when he died from cardiac arrhythmia in 2012
and his mother sued Monster alleging that his death was caused by his habitual consumption of
their energy drinks (Bleier, 2013; para. 3). The court alleges that Morris would not have died if
he did not consume two cans of Monster energy drinks everyday for three years. In other words,
the court was trying to say that Morris caused his own death by consuming too much of one
thing and it happened to be energy drinks. The court shifted the blame onto the victim. However,
if Morris had enough information about energy drinks, such as its side effects and warnings
about over-consumption, he would have the chance to make an informed decision.
Although it is true that too much of anything is bad, there must be some connection to
energy drinks, because there was another case that was similar to this. In December of 2011, a
14-year-old girl died of cardiac arrhythmia due to caffeine toxicity that prevented her heart from
pumping blood. She had consumed two 24-ounce cans of Monster within 24 hours of her death.
Again, Monster claimed that it does not believe its beverages are responsible for her death

(“Monster Energy Drink,” 2012; para. 6). Both victims died due to the same cause and both had
no prior history of any diseases. However, the company is denying any connection. The court has
again shifted the blame onto the victim for over-consumption. Instead of blaming the victim for
over-consumption, perhaps the court should have look into why an over-consumption of this
drink had such a bad effect. Since then, there has been more news reports on deaths related to
energy drinks and articles discussing the FDA’s lack of regulation. Furthermore, there have been
more articles released about the dangers of energy drinks in order to educate the public. This is
an effort to spread awareness of the effects of energy drinks so that people could make an
informed decision before purchasing an energy drink. It is easier to prevent a problem from
happening rather than trying to stop the problem. In this case, by informing the public on the
dangers of energy drinks, it will prevent them from wanting to consume these drinks. Thus, this
will lead to less people being affected by the side effects caused by energy drinks.
Even though the government is not doing much to regulate energy drinks, some senators
have been questioning the integrity of energy drink companies. At a hearing in 2013, three
Democratic senators, Durbin, Edward J. Markey and Richard Blumenthal, attacked industry
leaders for selling “unhealthy” products to adolescents (Koseff, 2013; para. 2). The hearing was
part of their campaign to limit the access that adolescents have to energy drinks. They urged the
FDA to investigate the safety of these drinks and have also urged high school and sports
organizations to educate their students and athletes on the risks of energy drinks. They also
referred to the death of the 14-year-old girl who died of cardiac arrhythmia. The two 24-ounce
Monster drinks she consumed contained 480 milligrams of caffeine, which is equal to 14 cans of
soda and five times the amount that the American Academy of Pediatrics’ daily recommended
amount for adolescents (Koseff, 2013; para. 9). These senators are using their position and their

power to spread awareness on this topic. They want the public to be aware of this issue and they
are urging the FDA to take action too. They are questioning the industry’s integrity on how they
allowed these drinks to be continually sold and consumed by adolescents. Therefore, these
senators have been trying to spread awareness and shed some light on this issue.
In addition to senators trying to give this topic some attention, 18 doctors have written a
letter in order to urge the FDA to apply GRAS standards for soft drinks to energy drinks. In this
letter, they have addressed the association between energy drinks and adolescents while
comparing energy drinks to coffee. They stressed on the fact that 30% to 50% of energy drinks
were consumed by adolescents and young adults (Gelski, 2013; para. 6). Not only are senators
trying to get the FDA’s attention on this issue, so are health experts. With this much attention
shed on this topic, should not the FDA do something about it other than put out “guidelines”?
This simply shows how important the issue of energy drink consumption by adolescents is.
Perhaps it is time to start educating young people on the dangers of energy drinks. Education
systems in the United States warn kids about the dangers of alcohol consumption, tobacco
smoking and even the effects of unprotected sex. Since adolescents consume energy drinks a lot,
they should be educated on energy drinks. They need to be aware of what is in these drinks and
what the possible health effects are so they could make an informed decision. This way, instead
of waiting for the FDA to regulate these drinks, society can start self-regulating their
consumption of these drinks.
Society in general tends to blame the government for not taking any action. What they do
not realize is that the government is made up of three parts - the judicial, the legislative and the
executive. This further adds complexity to this issue. All three parts make it hard for any
changes to take place. The judicial branch can only do something if there are big cases brought to

the Supreme Court, but no one is taking these cases to the court. The executive branch may only
pass or reject a bill. The executive branch cannot issue a change without having to gain the
approval of the legislative branch. However, not only is the legislative branch is made up of
lawmakers, it is also made up of money and corruption. Many companies pay senators to swing
their vote one way or another. It will be hard to make any changes if big companies are swaying
the vote by buying these votes. Therefore, in order to understand the complexity of this issue, it
is crucial to understand that the government cannot just make changes as they see fit.

CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION
Marketing energy drinks to teenagers poses ethical issues regarding the companies’ and
the government’s integrity. Such issues include the morality, integrity, responsibility and
honesty. Energy drink companies have agreed to not market to adolescents, but their actions
prove otherwise, which attests to their dishonesty. Referring to chapter two, their advertisements
show how they are applying youth marketing to appeal to adolescents. The advertising industry
have set a norm where it may seem okay to market to adolescents using the same techniques just
because other companies are doing it too. There also has been a lot of criticism regarding their
marketing techniques being similar to tobacco marketing. It is imperative to question how
consumers can trust their product when they cannot even trust these companies’ word on not
marketing to adolescents. These companies have been dishonest to consumers about the product
by falsely advertising them next to sports and not disclosing information about their ingredients.
Additionally, there is not a lot of research available on the combination of the ingredients in
energy drinks, but most of their ingredients are known to cause adverse health effects, such as
increased heart palpitations, increased chances of seizures, dehydration and insomnia. On the
other hand, it is immoral for scientists to have patients consume these drinks and wait for results.
Upon examining all of these factors, it may appear that companies care about their image and
profits more than their social liability.
On the other hand, the FDA has acknowledged multiple reports on the adverse health
risks and cases of death related to energy drinks, but they have not released any conclusions on
their investigation. Instead, they have released “guidelines” to help consumers distinguish
between energy drinks and dietary supplements. When compared to other governments, such as
Saudi Arabia who has completely banned advertising of energy drinks and banned the sale of

energy drinks to adolescents under 18, the United States is slacking in action against energy
drinks. However, there have been arguments against the government’s regulations. First, it can
ruin the consumer’s trust in the government and these companies. Second, it can bring negative
attention to the industry and ruin their business. It is immoral to ignore reports and continue to let
energy drink companies market their products without regulations. However, if strict regulations
are imposed, it can ruin the energy drink industry as well as consumers’ trust in both the industry
and the government.
It may take years before additional action is taken by these companies and by the
government. Because the government is made up of three parts, it makes it complicated and
difficult for changes to be made. So, where can we go from here? We can start by educating
adolescents on the adverse effects of energy drinks in schools. Not only that, we can start
educating the public as well. Change can only happen if the mass puts enough pressure on the
government. As previously mentioned, once the public knew about the dangers of cigarettes their
outrage pressured the government to outlaw marketing cigarettes to adolescents. Therefore,
society should first rely on itself instead of relying on the government to make any changes.
Additionally, more research should be conducted on the ingredients in these energy drinks. With
more research, there would be a better understanding of the effects energy drinks has on health.
At that point, the government can start taking appropriate action. This is a complex issue, but
with baby steps, monumental changes can be made.

REFERENCES
Beyranevand, L. J. (2013). Generally Recognized As Safe?: Analyzing Flaws In The FDA’s
Approach To GRAS Additives. Vermont Law Review, 37(4), 887-922. Retrieved from
http://lawreview.vermontlaw.edu/files/2013/08/9-Beyranevand.pdf
Bleier, K. (2013, June 13). Monster energy drink linked to another teen's death, lawsuit
filed. CBS News. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/lqp8u8m
Bouckley, B. (2014, March 11). Red Bull 'surprised' by Saudi Arabia energy drinks advertising
ban. BeverageDaily. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/psn5xny
Health Link BC. (n.d). Energy and sports drinks. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/qjkk8cw
Flynn, D. (2014, January 15). Energy drink makers get 'guidance' but no investigation into
deaths. Food Safety News. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/p8yx2x5
Gelski, J. (2013, March 20). Doctors question GRAS application to energy drinks. Food
Business News. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/nr8e8px
Hom, M. (2013, October 3). Acme, Taylor Swift, and a Diet Coke [Photograph]. Retrieved
from http://tinyurl.com/q2jwl7u
Koseff, A. (2013, August 31). 'Tobacco wars' senators take aim at energy drinks. LA Times.
Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/q8fzrnk
Marketing Schools. (n.d). Youth marketing. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/l4gy5wn
Miller, A. (2015, January 16). Are energy drinks really that bad? U.S News. Retrieved from
http://tinyurl.com/oqtfxgr
Monster Army. (2015). Athlete support. Retrieved from the Monster Army website
http://www.monsterarmy.com/about/
Monster energy drink maker sued for 14-year-old's death. (2012, October 22). CBS News.

Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/ozxc4fx
Olson, S. (2015, January 11). Energy drink companies target youth in marketing, senators
demand regulations. Medical Daily. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/qxm8a52
Pychotronic42. (2007, January 18). Flintstones cigarette commercial [Video file]. Retrieved
from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAExoSozc2c
Richards, J. W., Tye, J. B., & Fischer, P. M.. (1996). The Tobacco Industry's Code of
Advertising in the United States: Myth and Reality. Tobacco Control, 5(4), 295–311.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20207231
Schultz, H., & Runestad, T. (2012). Expanding Labeling Requirements for Dietary Supplements
Would Punish Consumers and Manufacturers. (L. M. Zott, Ed.), Opposing Viewpoints.
Alternative Medicine. Detroit: Greenhaven Press.
Schumaker, E. (2014, June 23). Just how dangerous are energy drinks, nnyway? Huffington
Post. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/oecjksk
Seifert, S. M., Schaechter, J. L., Hershorin, E. R., & Lipschultz, S. E. (2011). Health Effects of
Energy Drinks on Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults. Pediatrics, 127(3), 511-528.
doi:10.1542/Deds.2009-3592
Siccameht. (2010, January 17). Redbull - superhero [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTvG_2UKpyU
Sifferlin, A. (2015). Energy drinks have doctors worried--but business is booming. Time
International (Atlantic Edition), 186(1/2), 18-19.
Thrastardottir, A. (2014, November 3). A country in Europe bans energy drinks for minors.
Business Insider. Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/pj9956w
Villafranco, J. (2013, November 26). Are energy drinks the new tobacco? Nutritional Outlook.

Retrieved from http://tinyurl.com/p4zjtuc

Lily Zheng - Final Thesis Draft

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Lily Zheng - Final Thesis Draft

Similar to Lily Zheng - Final Thesis Draft (20)

Lily Zheng - Final Thesis Draft