Skip to main content
Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique logoLink to Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique
editorial
. 2016 Jan 1;107(1):e133–e135. doi: 10.17269/cjph.107.5199

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...: Energy “shots” should be regulated as energy drinks in Canada

David Hammond 123,, Jessica L Reid 223
PMCID: PMC6972414  PMID: 27348101

Abstract

In 2012, Health Canada transitioned caffeinated energy drinks from Natural Health Product to Food and Drug classification and regulations, implementing temporary guidelines with requirements such as caffeine content limits, mandatory cautionary labelling, and restrictions on health claims. “Energy shots” often contain as much or more caffeine compared to energy drinks and have been associated with a similar number of adverse health events. However, current requirements for energy drinks do not apply to energy shots, which remain classified as “natural health products” on the basis that they are “not consumed or perceived as foods” in the same way as energy drinks. An online survey was conducted with Canadian youth and young adults aged 12–24 years (N = 2040) in October 2014 to examine perceptions of energy shots. Respondents viewed an image of a popular energy shot and were asked which term best described it, with six randomly-ordered options. The vast majority (78.8%) perceived the energy shot as an “energy drink” (vs. “supplement”, “vitamin drink”, “natural health product”, “soft drink” or “food product”). Given consumer perceptions and the similarity in product constituents, there is little basis for regulating energy shots differently from energy drinks; these products should be subject to similar labelling and health warning requirements.

Key Words: Energy drinks, caffeine, policy

Footnotes

Financial Support: The project described in this report was funded by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Operating Grant (Evaluating the impact of Canada’s caffeinated energy drink policy among youth and young adults). DH is also supported by a CIHR New Investigator Award, and a Chair in Applied Public Health, funded by the Public Health Agency of Canada in partnership with the CIHR Institute of Neurosciences, Mental Health and Addiction (INMHA) and Institute of Population and Public Health (IPPH).

Conflict of Interest: None to declare.

References

  • 1.Health Canada, Food Directorate, Health ProductsFood Branch. Category Specific Guidance for Temporary Marketing Authorization–Caffeinated Energy Drinks. 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Health Canada. Lists of Foods That Have Received Temporary Marketing Authorization Letters. 2015. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Health Canada. Licensed Natural Health Products Database, 5-Hour Energy (NPN 80038715) 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mackrael K. The Globe and Mail. 2013. New limits placed on caffeine in ‘energy shots’. [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Health Canada. Canada Vigilance Adverse Reaction Online Database. Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/medeff/databasdon/index-eng.php (Accessed May 7, 2015).
  • 6.Mackrael K. The Globe and Mail. 2013. Health Canada okays ‘energy shot’ drinks while U.S. probes possible links to deaths. [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Meier B. New York Times. 2012. Caffeinated drink cited in reports of 13 deaths. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Reid JL, Hammond D. Evaluating the Impact of Canada’s Caffeinated Energy Drink Policy Among Youth and Young Adults: Online Survey, Technical Report. 2014. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Stephens MB, Attipoe S, Jones D, Ledford CJW, Deuster PA. Nutr Rev. 2014. Energy drink and energy shot use in the military; pp. 72–77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES