STiR coffee and tea magazine

24 STiR coffee and tea / Issue 3, 2018 (June / July) By Robert W. Thurston W hy, given the hundreds of studies that show coffee is good for health, did a California judge rule that coffee must be labeled a carcinogen in that state? The easy answer is that coffee contains acrylamide, a natural compound found in many cooked foods, and acrylamide can cause cancer. Because cof- fee companies have not displayed warnings about acrylamide, they may now be required to pay millions in fines, up to $2,500 per day since 1990. And cof- fee, after years of positive press, now must contend with a profoundly nega- tive image; the South Koreans are looking into coffee and acrylamide, and the Europeans were already worried about the compound. For the most part, acrylamide arises during cooking, especially frying or grilling, from low concentrations of the amino acid asparagine and free sug- ars. Acrylamide has always existed in cooked foods and beverages, but it was not until 2002 that Swedish researchers identified it there. Acrylamide is a minor by-product of the Maillard browning reaction that occurs at high tem- peratures. A Maillard reaction, takes place between amino acids and reducing sugars as they are heated. The reaction browns food and enhances flavor and aroma. Maillard reactions are an unavoidable part of roasting coffee beans. Branded: Coffee Unjustly Convicted by Court A Prop 65 warning label on display in a Star- bucks coffee shop in Oakland, Calif. Photo by Larry Kozimor. The judge in California, Judge Elihu Berle, who is not a scientist, based his decision on sci- ence–or so it appears at first glance. But the prob- lems in this case are manifold. The law behind the case, Proposition 65 (Prop 65), formally known as the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, is sloppy. California has an environmental agency that lists substances found to cause cancer or reproductive harm. As of the end of 2017, the Prop 65 list ran to 22 pages. A few items identified by the state agency, for instance tobacco smoke, are obvious. Several common medicines are also on the list, among them Warfarin, used to prevent the forma- tion of blood clots, and oral contraceptives. Thus the list is hardly an infallible guide to what any- one should ingest or avoid. Acrylamide appeared on the roll of harmful substances in 1990 as a carcinogen and again in 2011 as known to cause problems in human development and reproduc- tion. In short, acrylamide, in sufficient quantities, can cause both cancer and disruptions in DNA. But then, swallowing 200 aspirin tablets at once will blow out your stomach. Quantity, or dosage, is often everything in medicine and diet. Prop 65 opens a wide door for punitive suits. The law allows an individual or group, acting as a "private attorney general in the public interest," to bring a case against specific companies for a judgment and damages regarding a specific prod- uct. Already the weight of the state is behind the complainers. As though the "trials" were criminal cases, "plaintiffs" charge that "defendants" have done wrong. In the coffee trial, Starbucks, Peet's Coffee & Tea, and others, ultimately a total of 91 defendants, are named. In a law suit over substance on Prop 65's list, the burden of proof is entirely on the defendants to show that their product is not even remotely carcinogenic. They can first argue for "no sig- nificant risk level," meaning that exposure to the amount of chemical in the product would result in no more than one case of cancer for every 100,000

• Cover