Top Menu

Alcohol Watchdogs Target Supersized Alcopops as Urgent Issue


Following the success of a coalition of public health organizations, government agencies and health experts in forcing the alcohol industry to remove caffeine from alcoholic beverages, a new public health threat is emerging: supersized alcopops.

These products come in 23.5 ounce, single-serving cans that look like soft drink containers, with up to 12 percent alcohol content—the equivalent of 4.7 standard drinks.

“These products are extremely dangerous because they’re cheap, taste like soda and provide young people with a big bang for their buck,” says Michele Simon, JD, MPH, president of the consulting firm Eat Drink Politics, and the former research and policy director of Alcohol Justice, an alcohol industry watchdog group. “We need to bring these drinks down to a single serving.” She helped Alcohol Justice write model state legislation that would accomplish this.

In early October, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) forced an agreement with the manufacturer of the alcopop Four Loko to change the labels of the cans to say the drinks contain as much alcohol as four to five cans of beer. The FTC says the manufacturer, Phusion Projects, falsely claimed that a 23.5-ounce can of Four Loko contains the same amount of alcohol as one or two regular 12-ounce beers. Drinking a single can of Four Loko in one sitting constitutes binge drinking, according to federal guidelines.

Phusion Projects also will be required to use only resealable containers for flavored malt beverages that have more alcohol than the equivalent of two and a half regular beers. The company has not admitted to any wrongdoing, but says it will relabel the drinks to better inform its customers.

Simply putting a new label and resealable cap on the can is not enough, Simon argues. “This is really a win for the companies making these products,” she says. “We have no evidence that putting a label on the can to essentially advertise how much alcohol it contains is a deterrent, or that a resealable container will discourage people from drinking the entire contents at one time.”

A major concern with the FTC agreement is manufacturers may use it to dissuade states who want to go further in regulating alcopops. “Companies can just point to the FTC agreement as a stamp of approval and claim nothing else is needed,” Simon notes.

The campaign that eliminated caffeine from alcoholic drinks was built on a number of factors, including research showing the detrimental health effects of mixing caffeine and alcohol. One study showed this combination makes a person feel less drunk but does not lessen the effects of alcohol. Another showed a higher risk of injury from mixing alcohol with energy drinks than from alcohol alone.

State attorneys general became involved, negotiating agreements with several alcohol manufacturers to stop producing various caffeinated alcopops. In addition, a number of states introduced legislation to ban caffeine in alcohol, although all of the bills were defeated. Several states then successfully passed legislation regulating where alcopops were sold. In November 2010, the FTC and the Food and Drug Administration notified four companies, including Phusion Projects, that their products were unsafe, unapproved and deceptively marketed.

This November, attorneys general in 35 states and the San Francisco City Attorney asked the FTC to limit the amount of alcohol sold in a single-serving can to two servings.

The campaign to remove caffeine from alcopops demonstrates how important advocacy on the state level is in building momentum that drives federal action, Simon says. “The industry doesn’t want to deal with 50 state policies, and is at times willing to consider one uniform federal policy,” she says. “But this solution is unacceptable.”

Until the federal government takes steps to rid the market of supersized alcoholic drinks, advocates recommend that states pass laws against them. “From a legal perspective, no matter what the federal government does, states still retain the authority to go further,” she adds.

Concerned citizens who want to do away with supersized alcopops in their communities have several options, according to Simon. “Contact your state legislator about introducing a bill that would require these products to be sold in single-serving containers,” she says. She also advises getting in contact with your state alcohol beverage control agency and state attorney general’s office to encourage them to work on the issue.

Simon also recommends that community groups put pressure on local retailers and wholesalers to stop carrying supersized alcoholic drinks. “It’s important to hold every sector of the market chain—from manufacturers to distributors to retailers—accountable for flooding our communities with these dangerous products and helping to put them in the hands of young people.”

6 Responses to this article

  1. Avatar of kjb
    kjb / January 19, 2012 at 2:39 am

    I think the problem is not that people of legal drinking age can’t decide how much to drink. It’s that the “energy drinks” are marketed to a much younger group. They are in the cooler next to nonalcoholic energy drinks and they make underage drinking even more accessible. You have to know what your looking for to tell the difference and store clerks don’t often pay attention.

  2. Avatar of Ryan
    Ryan / December 3, 2011 at 4:15 am

    Maybe a better example would be craft beer. Many craft beers, made by small brewing companies using quality natural ingredients, contain just as much alcohol by volume as a Four Loko. I’m a college student, of legal drinking age, and I enjoy some of these beers. I don’t do Bud Light, it’s too much like making love in canoe. How would you draft legislation banning the sale of Four Loko in oversized cans without catching imperial stout, double ipa, and barleywine in crossfire?

  3. maxpost / December 2, 2011 at 4:36 pm

    I don’t think Starks gets it– a 12 pack of Bud has 12-ounce containers of regular (not 12%) beer, — not this huge 23.5 oz. going flat telling a dutiful youngster not to waste any (i.e. drink the entire “four standare drinks in a can”). The superstitious fear of germs may also help to prevent several youngsters sharing ONE can thus defeating the $$ merchandisers. Finally, $igarette companies profit from this engineered overdosage because some kids will try addictive nicotine to relieve hangover symptoms or– watch out– “clear” the mind to drive the car home “safely”.

  4. Avatar of Starks
    Starks / December 2, 2011 at 2:09 pm

    I can buy cigarettes and get drafted at 18 but God forbid I get caffeine in my booze at 21. Quite the country we live in.

    How about we advocate effective decision-making and common sense, thus letting companies succeed or fail based on intelligent consumerism. How about we stop making decisions for people and let them start making their own. The more you treat people like children, the more they act like children.

    You can’t punish someone for consuming something ‘bad’ for them. So Four Loko should get punished, but McDonald’s is a billion dollar business? Please. If we’re outlawing these drinks we should outlaw french fries.

    If you want to eat BigMac’s for your 3 square a day, fine. Just don’t expect to have your healthcare paid for by the American taxpayer. You want to drink $2.50 ‘blackout in a can,’ fine. You better damn well not get behind the wheel or commit crimes under the influence.

    So you’re telling me I can walk into a 7-11, buy a Big Gulp of Coke, and a 12 pack of Bud, go home — consume it all… and not be punished, yet Four Loko gets a bad rap? Does anyone else not see how incredibly ridiculous all this is?!

  5. Lew Bryson / December 2, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    How do you write a law that only restricts THESE beverages to a single serving container? There are plenty of cheap, sweet, flavored fortified wines that come in much larger containers; there are cheap vodkas that have more alcohol in smaller containers. This is a slippery catch.

  6. Avatar of Dan Haffey
    Dan Haffey / December 2, 2011 at 12:36 pm

    Its about time we start looking at how the alcohol industry is misleading young people into a false sense that alcopops are not harmful. look at crime and prison rates for young people across the country and you will see that their only agenda with energy and alcohol is money. Safety and concern for young people is not an option for the industry.

Leave a Reply

Please read our comment policy and guidelines before you submit a comment. Your email address will not be published. Thank you for visiting

+ 2 = six

Reproduction in whole or in part of this publication is strictly prohibited without prior consent. Photographic rights remain the property of Join Together and the Partnership for Drug-Free Kids. For reproduction inquiries, please e-mail