Via The New York Observer, I see that Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-New York) has urged the Food and Drug Administration to put a hold on the sale of Aero Shot, a new breathable caffeine and vitamin product, out of fear that club goers might use it to party later into the night. According to the company that developed the product, each "shot" contains 100mg of caffeine, as well as some Vitamin B. On the product website, Tom Hadfield, the CEO of the company, notes that the shots contain "the same amount of caffeine as a cup of premium coffee." Compared to the java served at Starbucks, however, that's not quite correct: According to the Mayo Clinic, a 16 oz cup of Pike Place roast has about 330mg of caffeine on average, making it far more caffeinated than an Aero Shot. So why go after Aero Shot but not Starbucks? There doesn't seem to be any clear reason to make a distinction. And it's not as if Schumer has a problem with coffee drinkers getting their fix. Indeed, he's actually fought for policies explicitly on the grounds that they would make coffee more affordable; in 2010, he went on a minor crusade against overseas coffee growers for stockpiling coffee beans, which he warned would hike retail prices for a cup of joe. The only notable difference between coffee drinkers getting their fix in the morning after staying out too late and Aero Shot shooters ingesting breathable caffeine power in order to stay out a little later seems to be that Schumer wants to protect the former and prohibit the latter.
Watch Reason.tv on why the feds, encouraged by legislators like Sen. Schumer, banned Four Loko: