but in all seriousness it would be fine if they just labeled this better, but it is advertised as much caffeine as coffee. but 390 mg for 30-oz is actually much less than coffee. sorry to be a downer, its very fun to say "the lemonade that kills people". they should also take away free refills and not let people serve themself.
The caffeine in coffee has a much lower bioavailability than in energy drinks like this though. Most of the caffeine is locked behind the crll walls in coffee and tea, and oir body has a lot if trouble accessing it. Energy drinks have pure caffeine added into them and it is much more readily available for our bodies to absorb.
To think of it another way, a typical joint with about a gram of marijuana has about 120-200mg of thc in it. Taking that much thc in an edible would absolutely blast you to the moon, but smoking just gets you regularly high.
ok intresting! that tracks but what is "pure caffeine"? because i saw it called green coffee extract, like what they have at starbucks. is this a marketing term for pure caffeine?
edit. yeah googling and im not sure its the same type of caffeine as in energy drinks. do you mean synthetic caffine? when you say pure caffeine? really trying to learn more. becaue just looking online it says that synthetic caffine is the one your body absorbs faster and this is not synthetic caffine. so the lemonade still may be in the clear lol.
Pure caffeine was pure wording on my part. "More refined" is what i should have said instead. Coffee and green tea extracts get mashed up and boiled, same as when we use them for regular coffee or tea, but then they will use a series of solvents to further break down the cell walls and further extract the caffeine.
i don't think there would be a chemical difference between synthetic & extracted caffeine. as near as i can tell "green coffee extract" is homeopath for the byproduct of water treated (possibly other methods) decaffination.
however the bioavailability stuff i can't verify, seems like we're doing our best to penetrate those cell walls with coffee/tea preparation, lol.
All I have is anecdote, but a 16oz monster doesn't get me any more wired than the ~18g of coffee beans in my morning cup. Caffeine estimates for my beans sits at about 144mg vs 140mg in a monster.
i've never really noticed any significant differences either. maybe bioavailability isn't the correct term for looking this up but i can't find any studies comparing ingestion methods vs. effects
just black coffee lol. 20-ounce light roast at panera has 384 mg of caffeine and thats ten oz less.
edit, like what do you even mean what coffee are you drinking. any coffee literally any cup off coffee???
The 390 mg one is also the large. The regular clocks in at 260 I believe, which (while objectively not a small amount) is far more within the realms of sanity. Just don't go all Murica with the sizing and it shouldn't really be much of a concern.
but in all seriousness it would be fine if they just labeled this better, but it is advertised as much caffeine as coffee. but 390 mg for 30-oz is actually much less than coffee. sorry to be a downer, its very fun to say "the lemonade that kills people". they should also take away free refills and not let people serve themself.
The caffeine in coffee has a much lower bioavailability than in energy drinks like this though. Most of the caffeine is locked behind the crll walls in coffee and tea, and oir body has a lot if trouble accessing it. Energy drinks have pure caffeine added into them and it is much more readily available for our bodies to absorb.
To think of it another way, a typical joint with about a gram of marijuana has about 120-200mg of thc in it. Taking that much thc in an edible would absolutely blast you to the moon, but smoking just gets you regularly high.
ok intresting! that tracks but what is "pure caffeine"? because i saw it called green coffee extract, like what they have at starbucks. is this a marketing term for pure caffeine?
edit. yeah googling and im not sure its the same type of caffeine as in energy drinks. do you mean synthetic caffine? when you say pure caffeine? really trying to learn more. becaue just looking online it says that synthetic caffine is the one your body absorbs faster and this is not synthetic caffine. so the lemonade still may be in the clear lol.
Pure caffeine was pure wording on my part. "More refined" is what i should have said instead. Coffee and green tea extracts get mashed up and boiled, same as when we use them for regular coffee or tea, but then they will use a series of solvents to further break down the cell walls and further extract the caffeine.
very cool!
i don't think there would be a chemical difference between synthetic & extracted caffeine. as near as i can tell "green coffee extract" is homeopath for the byproduct of water treated (possibly other methods) decaffination.
however the bioavailability stuff i can't verify, seems like we're doing our best to penetrate those cell walls with coffee/tea preparation, lol.
All I have is anecdote, but a 16oz monster doesn't get me any more wired than the ~18g of coffee beans in my morning cup. Caffeine estimates for my beans sits at about 144mg vs 140mg in a monster.
i've never really noticed any significant differences either. maybe bioavailability isn't the correct term for looking this up but i can't find any studies comparing ingestion methods vs. effects
It's more caffeine than you get from an equal volume of Red Bull. Dunno what coffee you're drinking.
just black coffee lol. 20-ounce light roast at panera has 384 mg of caffeine and thats ten oz less. edit, like what do you even mean what coffee are you drinking. any coffee literally any cup off coffee???
The 390 mg one is also the large. The regular clocks in at 260 I believe, which (while objectively not a small amount) is far more within the realms of sanity. Just don't go all Murica with the sizing and it shouldn't really be much of a concern.
The 390 is to skirt the FDA recommendation of 400mg per day while allowing a reasonable margin of error.
Unfortunately self serve fountains don't really imply "q per customer" so it was pointless.