(NaturalNews) Walgreens and the parent company of Tylenol are being sued by an Illinois woman whose infant son died after being given two separate medicines marketed by those companies for use on children.
"This may be the first case against manufacturers of infant cold and cough medicines with dextromethorphan," said Ralph Davis, attorney for the plaintiff.
Dimitria Alvarez alleges that Walgreen Co. and McNeil-PPC Inc., owned by Johnson & Johnson, should have known of the dangers of the cough suppressant dextromethorphan; that slow metabolism could lead to toxic buildup of the chemical; that there had been deaths associated with the ingredient's use in children: and that its effectiveness on children had never been tested.
An FDA advisory panel recently recommended that the agency ban the marketing of cold medications to children under the age of 6, and both Walgreens and McNeil voluntarily removed such medications from the market in response on October 11.
This had not yet occurred when Alvarez' 4-month-old son Devon Mehlberg-Alvarez began sniffling and coughing on October 4. According to Davis, Alvarez gave her child Infant Tylenol Cold and Decongestant Plus and Walgreen Pediatric Drops-Cough Plus Cold.
On October 8, Alvarez found her son dead in his crib. A coroner's report concluded that he died from dextromethorphan intoxication.
According to Davis, Alvarez initially believed that it was something unique to her son's metabolism that had caused the cold medicine to be fatal to him. It was only after she learned of the FDA panel's recommendations and that other such deaths had been reported that she decided the drug companies were responsible.
In response to the lawsuit, Walgreens spokesperson Carol Hiveley suggested that Alvarez might have inappropriately given her son both medications at the same time. But Davis refuted this charge, saying that the medications were given consecutively over the course of several days, and that the indicated doses were followed.
Original here
Industry:
Food and Beverage Summary:
The Company's operations are comprised of the following principal business segments: domestic beer, international beer, packaging and entertainment. Primary executive:
August A. Busch, IV, 
I lost track of Paul over the years, so I never knew if he picked up on the whole Red Bull-and-vodka craze, a younger generation’s version of his late-night party prolonger. But the brewing industry has, with some small but solid success in the higher-priced niche of energy beers. But the rollout of these beers has also sparked a negative reaction by antialcohol institutions, which see these potions as the latest threat to America’s under-21 crowd.
Caffeinated beers have been around for a few years, bouncing from promotion to promotion as companies looked for an effective way to market them. SAB Miller has Sparks,
Anheuser-Busch sells Bud Extra (originally labeled a ridiculously unpronounceable Be, which we were told was “B to the E”) and Tilt, and smaller companies have jumped in with brands like Liquid Core, Moonshot, and Rock Star 21, a spin-off from the established Rock Star energy drink.There have been a few coffee-flavored craft beers with relatively small amounts of caffeine. That’s not the model here. When you open up a Sparks or Tilt, it’s clear from the first citrusy-fruity whiff and thickly sweet flavor that Red Bull was on the formulators’ minds. (Moonshot is the exception, a straight-up light pilsner with the caffeine of one cup of coffee hidden inside.)
Red Bull became an enormous success—they hold half of a U.S. energy drink market worth over $4 billion—by adding caffeine and taurine (along with a barrage of guerrilla marketing) to the sugars and flavor of drinks like Gatorade. Drinkers, bartenders, and spirits companies were quick to add a shot of booze. Red Bull with vodka and the Jägerbomb (a shot of Jägermeister liqueur in a glass of Red Bull) quickly became the hot tonics for the party-all-night crowd.
The energy beers have put the stimulant cocktail in a can, making for one less step in the mixing process, always a plus behind the bar or at a fast-moving house party. It’s also an easy package to pick up at the store. Volume has been relatively small—Sparks sold about 350,000 barrels last year, less than 1 percent of Miller’s total—but, like energy drinks, energy beers sell for a premium: more than $2 a can on most retail shelves, about twice as much as a mainstream beer.
What makes these prepackaged buzz bombs even more attractive to producers and retailers is that they’re still cheaper than spirits-based cocktails because they’re beer based. For arcane policy reasons, beer is taxed at a significantly lower federal rate than wine or spirits, and usually at a lower state rate as well. Drinks like Smirnoff Ice and Bacardi Silver are beer based, despite their liquor-brand nameplates, because of that tax differential.
That’s one of the things that put energy beers on the hit list of antialcohol groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which recently announced its intent to sue A.B. and Miller over the drinks, charging that they are aimed at underage drinkers and contain more alcohol than standard beers. Similar organizations have agitated for taxing the drinks at the higher liquor rate and for banning any use of caffeine in alcohol beverages. Last year 29 state attorneys general sent a letter to A.B. that sharply criticized the company’s energy beers, including a 12 percent alcohol product called Spykes—packaged in 2-ounce bottles—that has since been withdrawn.
Even though caffeine-overdose deaths are very rare, assertions are being made that alcohol energy drinks suppress the effects of intoxication, leading young people to drink more than they would otherwise. These new drinks are deemed different and dangerous, because, they note, they’re “marketed to underage drinkers.”
I don’t think much of these drinks as beers, per se. As a category, they’re overly sweet, goopy with fruit flavors, and not much for pairing with food. Yet I also don’t see them as very different from Red Bull cocktails, coffee liqueurs, and Paul’s Old Grand-Dad and coffee. Still, at some point the question will come up whether the profits from this niche are worth the negative publicity they generate. Judging from the past, once these groups start beating the drums on a topic, they don’t give up.
Original here
But if the numbers are any indication, a little copper formaldehyde poisoning isn't going to stop anyone from getting their drink on, because tharra continues to kill hundreds of people each year. 
Boasting a 97 percent alcohol content that should earn it a skull and crossbones on the label, the cheap aftershaves are often bottled to resemble cheap vodka, because, you know, drinking out of an actual aftershave bottle would just be humiliating. 
But that's where the normalcy ends. Thunderbird was introduced shortly after prohibition ended by E&J Gallo Winery. According to 
But most recipes don't call for hiding the contents away in a Ziploc bag out of the line of sight of prison guards so they can ferment for days on end either. And that is the long and short of the pruno-making process. Add ingredients in a Ziploc bag, let it rot, heat it occasionally, strain it, drink it.
In a simpler world, changaa would just be another variety of home-brewed alcohol, like moonshine in the US or tharra in India. But in Kenya, the production of changaa is often controlled by criminal gangs who are in competition with each other. With that competition comes a willingness to go to dastardly lengths to make sure one gang's changaa provides more of a "kick" than the competitor's changaa. 
Posts
