Discussion:
California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
Add Reply
mg
2018-04-06 13:05:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning

AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018

Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.

The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.

The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html




-------------------------------
Q. What is endless love?

A. Helen Keller and Ray Charles
playing tennis.
GLOBALIST
2018-04-06 14:36:09 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018
Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.
The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html
-------------------------------
Q. What is endless love?
A. Helen Keller and Ray Charles
playing tennis.
How many times in our lifetime have we head this?
At least a dozen times.
mg
2018-04-07 00:08:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 07:36:09 -0700 (PDT), GLOBALIST
Post by GLOBALIST
Post by mg
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018
Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.
The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html
-------------------------------
Q. What is endless love?
A. Helen Keller and Ray Charles
playing tennis.
How many times in our lifetime have we head this?
At least a dozen times.
I don't think I've ever heard about coffee causing cancer before. I
have heard about bacon, for instance, causing cancer.
d***@gmail.com
2018-04-07 00:19:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
mg wrote:

<< I don't think I've ever heard about coffee causing cancer before. I
have heard about bacon, for instance, causing cancer. >>

I heard about it from my wife concerning Starbuck's dark roast. It's roasted at such a high temperature in order to make it strong, that it is burned food and thus carcinogenic.

Eugene FitzAubrey
rumpelstiltskin
2018-04-07 04:35:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018
Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.
The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html
This is an example of why the rest of the country thinks
that California is a nut case. I don't mind that, and I agree
with it in a good-natured way, but although there are
49 other states, I'm not even 1/49 as tempted to live in any
of them than I am to live in California. Except maybe
Hawaii, but I agree (probably) with Donald Trump that
Hawaii isn't really a state.
Post by mg
-------------------------------
Q. What is endless love?
A. Helen Keller and Ray Charles
playing tennis.
mg
2018-04-09 02:19:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018
Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.
The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html
This is an example of why the rest of the country thinks
that California is a nut case. I don't mind that, and I agree
with it in a good-natured way, but although there are
49 other states, I'm not even 1/49 as tempted to live in any
of them than I am to live in California. Except maybe
Hawaii, but I agree (probably) with Donald Trump that
Hawaii isn't really a state.
I remember years ago when they announced that saccharin caused cancer.
It was sort of funny in a way when you consider all the trouble that
people were going to in an attempt to be healthy and how nasty
saccharin tasted, or at least I thought it did.

But it really wasn't funny, at all, I guess. I guess it's just one
more illustration of the tragedy of the human situation.
rumpelstiltskin
2018-04-09 05:26:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018
Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.
The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html
This is an example of why the rest of the country thinks
that California is a nut case. I don't mind that, and I agree
with it in a good-natured way, but although there are
49 other states, I'm not even 1/49 as tempted to live in any
of them than I am to live in California. Except maybe
Hawaii, but I agree (probably) with Donald Trump that
Hawaii isn't really a state.
I remember years ago when they announced that saccharin caused cancer.
It was sort of funny in a way when you consider all the trouble that
people were going to in an attempt to be healthy and how nasty
saccharin tasted, or at least I thought it did.
But it really wasn't funny, at all, I guess. I guess it's just one
more illustration of the tragedy of the human situation.
I use "Splenda" for almost everything. I do buy sugar
occasionally, but it lasts me months, maybe more than
a year. Of course, there are people who claim that
Splenda kills you too. You can't win.


Razors pain you;
Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you;
And drugs cause cramp.
Guns aren’t lawful;
Nooses give;
Gas smells awful;
You might as well live.

-- Dorothy Parker
mg
2018-04-09 11:35:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
Post by rumpelstiltskin
Post by mg
"California judge rules that coffee requires cancer warning
AP, 7:21 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018 Updated 7:30 AM ET Fri, 30 Mar 2018
Scientists haven't rendered a verdict on whether coffee is good or bad
for you but a California judge has. He says coffee sellers in the
state should have to post cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical produced in the bean roasting process that
is a known carcinogen and has been at the heart of an eight-year legal
struggle between a tiny nonprofit group and Big Coffee.
The Council for Education and Research on Toxics wanted the coffee
industry to remove acrylamide from its processing — like potato chip
makers did when it sued them years ago — or disclose the danger in
ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp.,
said the level of the chemical in coffee isn't harmful and any risks
are outweighed by benefits. . . ."
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/30/california-judge-rules-that-coffee-requires-cancer-warning.html
This is an example of why the rest of the country thinks
that California is a nut case. I don't mind that, and I agree
with it in a good-natured way, but although there are
49 other states, I'm not even 1/49 as tempted to live in any
of them than I am to live in California. Except maybe
Hawaii, but I agree (probably) with Donald Trump that
Hawaii isn't really a state.
I remember years ago when they announced that saccharin caused cancer.
It was sort of funny in a way when you consider all the trouble that
people were going to in an attempt to be healthy and how nasty
saccharin tasted, or at least I thought it did.
But it really wasn't funny, at all, I guess. I guess it's just one
more illustration of the tragedy of the human situation.
I use "Splenda" for almost everything. I do buy sugar
occasionally, but it lasts me months, maybe more than
a year. Of course, there are people who claim that
Splenda kills you too. You can't win.
Razors pain you;
Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you;
And drugs cause cramp.
Guns aren’t lawful;
Nooses give;
Gas smells awful;
You might as well live.
-- Dorothy Parker
Death is one of those realities of life that I never become
comfortable with no matter how long, or how much, I think about it and
I find myself thinking about it a lot more since I had open heart
surgery. I'm now back to feeling good again, though, for the first
time since last September. That's approximately 6 months of feeling
like crap, but that's a lot better than the alternative, obviously.
Loading...