We at Twenty-One Debunked believe that while a drinking age of 18 for alcohol would be rather progressive (compared to the current 21 in the USA, and 20 in Iceland), a drinking age of 18 for non-alcoholic energy drinks (compared to no age limit currently in the USA) would be utterly regressive, and thus we oppose any such attempts to enact one. The alternatives we would support, though are not necessarily wedded to, include the following:
- Better public education about the very real hazards of excessive energy drink consumption at any age, and any special or increased risks that children and early teens (i.e. those under 15) may face.
- Tax energy drinks themselves, as well as tax sugary drinks in general and/or even tax the sugar itself at the source.
- Consider setting a reasonable limit on caffeine content, and banning any drinks over that limit (i.e. Red Bull would be fine, but Redline would be banned). Ditto for any other ingredients that may be harmful and/or of questionable benefit.
- Restrict advertising and marketing that targets children and teens.
- Better labeling of caffeine content as well as any other ingredients, and better quality control of energy drinks as well.
- And last but not least, make the school day start later and ease up a bit on the homework, so children and teens don't feel the need to be quite so caffeinated (and sleep-deprived) all the time.
People who believe that minimum ages are the cures to social problems are imbeciles, including many Democrats. The tendency to view young people as self-destructive, impulsive and unable to do good decision making are stereotypes that have been around for decades. It will be a long time before such stereotypes can even be touched. Energy drinks shouldn't have a minimum age, it's common sense.
ReplyDelete