Tag Archives: Senator Chuck Schumer

08/4/20

The Future of Powdered Alcohol

© tashatuvango | stockfresh.com

Have you ever heard of powered alcohol? Did you know a powered alcohol product called Palcohol was approved for sale in the U.S. in April of 2014? Within a couple of weeks of approval, the US Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) recalled the approval of seven Palcohol labels, saying they were issued in error. According to Mark Phillips, the creator of Palcohol, the original label wording was edgy, “and everything went nuts” when their unfinished website was revealed. On March 11, 2015, TTB finally approved four Palcohol labels, permitting the product to be sold, but the current Palcohol website says it won’t come to market until late 2021, at the earliest.

In a video on the current Palcohol website, Phillips said because they weren’t prepared with the proper message about Palcohol, “People imagined how it would be used.” Reports said it would be easier to get drunk by snorting it; easier to secret sneak alcohol into places; easier to spike a drink; and easier for kids to get ahold of it. Phillips said, “All of those statements couldn’t be further from the truth.” The so-called last straw, was Senator Charles Schumer’s call to ban Palcohol, which he supported by drafting a bill. The legislation has yet to make it to the floor of the Senate for a vote.

Mark Phillips claimed Schumer was completely ignorant about the truth of Palcohol. According to Phillips, Schumer’s letter to the FDA and his press conference were so riddled with inaccuracies and irresponsible statements, he just had to “set the record straight.” He then spent another fifteen minutes attempting to do just that. In conclusion, he said Palcohol is a revolutionary product with so many positive uses for consumers and businesses: “Why would anyone want to ban powered alcohol with all the benefits to society?” Let’s see.

There was a May 2014 report that “Schumer Wants FDA to Halt Approval of Palcohol.”  Senator Schumer called Palcohol “the Kool-Aid of teen binge drinking.” The Albany County Sheriff said he visited the Palcohol website before it was revised and saw quotes from Phillips indicating it could be snorted. He reportedly saw pictures under the Palcohol name where it was cut into lines like cocaine. There was also a picture of doughnuts where people were pouring a Palcohol pouch on the doughnuts.

There was a screen shot taken from the initial “edgy” website suggesting you could take Palcohol to a concert to have a mixed drink at a fraction of the cost. If you were a college football fan, it suggested you could “Bring Palcohol in and enjoy the game.” There were several different food suggestions, and a reminder to add Palcohol AFTER the dish is cooked as the alcohol would burn off if you cook with it. With regard to snorting Palcohol, they cautioned to be careful. “You’ll get drunk almost instantly because the alcohol will be absorbed so quickly in your nose.”

When I wrote “Hype Over Powered Alcohol” five years ago, I described how someone writing for Vice related how he made his own powered alcohol and sprinkled it on pizza. Then he snorted it and lit it on fire. He said powered alcohol, at least his 192-proof grain alcohol version, burned like napalm.

The National Alcohol Beverage Control Association (NABCA) has a report of a white paper on its site, “Powered Alcohol: An Encapsulation.”  The origins of powered alcohol dated back to the 19th century, when William Clotwoethy was issued a patent to be used in the food industry. In 1964, Harold Bode filed a patent for an “alcoholic dry beverage powder.” In 1976 General Foods was granted a patent for an “alcohol-containing dextrin powder” that could be used in food and as “a high ethanol-containing powder” that could be used as a base for alcoholic drinks.

The NABCA noted the temporary approval of Palcohol in 2014 began a wave of concern among lawmakers such as Charles Schumer. While there is no current federal legislation banning powered alcohol, many states have done so. The Alcohol Justice website lists 34 states that ban powered alcohol, 12 with no legislation (Montana, Wyoming, South Dakota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Missouri, Kentucky, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Mississippi and Florida) and three (Arizona, Colorado and Texas) that allow powered alcohol. The NABCA also described some potential public health and safety risks of using powered alcohol. It cited the American Medical Association’s June 2016 press release calling for a ban on powered alcohol, because it has “the potential to cause serious harm to minors.” Further, the NABCA noted the possibility that powered alcohol could be snorted and its easy concealment means it could be given to an unsuspecting person.

There was a 2016 study of the awareness and likelihood of college students using powered alcohol published in The American Journal on Addictions. 1,841 undergraduate students were asked if they had heard of powered alcohol or Palcohol. Only 16.4% had previously heard of powered alcohol. Those who had not heard of it were provided with the following description of powered alcohol:

Powdered alcohol is freeze-dried alcohol (rum or vodka), in a powdered form packaged in individual serving size packets. One packet added to 6 ounces of liquid is equal in potency to a standard mixed-drink. It is sold under the brand name “Palcohol.”

When asked if powered alcohol should be legal in their state, 13.8% said “definitely no,” 25.9% indicated “no,” 40.4% said “possibly,” 13.7% said “yes,” and only 6.1% responded “definitely yes.” Nearly 25% said they were likely to use it if/when it became available. They were also asked about their current alcohol use, and then the likelihood of them using powered alcohol (Palcohol) before they were of legal age or of their friends using it. They were asked whether or not they would try various ways of ingesting powered alcohol, such as mixing it with alcohol, not water; sneaking it into a place where it was prohibited (like a football game); snorting it; smoking it; eating it. Only 16.4% of students had heard of powered alcohol before. 23.3% said they were “extremely likely” or “likely” to try it; and 62.2% said they would misuse it.

Specifically, these participants who intended to use powdered alcohol indicated being “likely” or “extremely likely” to misuse in the following ways: use the product although underage (37.2%), sneak the product into restricted places (22.9%), mix the product with alcohol instead of water (16.1%), eat the powdered alcohol (i.e., sprinkle on food; 8.6%), snort the powdered alcohol (3.9%), and smoke the product (1.6%).

The authors said it was logical to predict that with professional marketing, social media, and peer influence, actual use of powered alcohol among college students would exceed 25%. However, a more alarming issue was that among college students indicating the likelihood of using powered alcohol, over 60% indicated they would misuse it in some way. Most said they would misuse it by sneaking the product into restrictive venues. “Not surprisingly, likelihood to use and misuse powdered alcohol was also highly correlated with hazardous drinking, which indicates that those most likely to use powdered alcohol are also at high risk for experiencing alcohol-related problems.”

The creator of Palcohol, Mark Phillips, seems to have failed to put the record straight on powered alcohol. The issues that he dismissed as being made up and far from the truth seem to have been central concerns of the American Medical Association and acknowledged as risks by the NABCA, the National Alcohol Beverage Control Association. Senator Charles Schumer also seems to have been less ignorant about the dangers of powdered alcohol than Phillips thought he was. And Schumer’s rhetorical statement of Palcohol being “the Kool-Aid of teen binge drinking” was supported by the 2016 study, “Powered Alcohol: Awareness and Likelihood of Use Among a Sample of College Students;” at least among teen-aged college students.

Can you imagine a future without Palcohol? We can hope for one, as the potential risks seem to outweigh the so-called benefits.

12/1/17

Snorting Chocolate

© deandrobot |stockfresh.com

You probably won’t see any of this product in your kids Trick or Treat stash, but keep a lookout for a tin of Coco Loko in their rooms just in case. Yes, you read that correctly. Coco Loko is snortable chocolate powder. Marketed by Legal Lean, the Florida-based company founded by Nick Anderson, Coco Loko is the first product of its kind in the US. Similar products have been available in Europe for several years. After ordering and trying one, Anderson decided to create his own “raw cacao snuff.” So he invested $10,000 with an Orlando-based supplement company and created Coco Loko.

The Washington Post quoted Anderson as saying the effect is “almost like an energy-drink feeling, like you’re euphoric but also motivated to get things done.” He said he uses his product as an alternative to drinking and at music festivals and in “those types of social situations when you feel anxious.” Rolling Stone reported that Coco Loko promised a “30-minute buzz,” that would lift moods, reduce anxiety and give you a surge of energy. “Legal Lean claims Coco Loko will cause a rush of endorphins and serotonin, boost energy, and bring about a sense of calm. But the company hasn’t provided concrete research to back up those claims.”

However, the company website now refers to its product as “Coco Snuff” and the overt claims noted in Rolling Stone and other media write ups just after its release and attributed to Legal Lean are now not directly attributed to Coco Loko/Coco Snuff. Legal Lean makes no such claims anymore about Coco Snuff. You learn about endorphins, that a serotonin rush produces “an elevated mood and a state similar to the feeling of ecstasy [not the drug ecstasy]. This is the feeling that will make the music sound better and overall happiness.” Gee, isn’t that why the drug ecstasy was used at raves?

Raw cacao is said to give you a steady rush of euphoric energy that helps party goers “Dance the nigh away without a crash.” Then it claims raw cacao can give you a “calm focus,” reducing the chatter in your brain. “It is also known to help with anxiety and to reduce stress.”

The revisions to product description are likely the result of action taken by Senator Chuck Schumer where he called on the FDA to formally launch an investigation into “Coco Loko.” He said the product was a “brazen example of ‘narcotic marketing.’” He said it was like cocaine on training wheels. Schumer, The Washington Post and others (like The Fix) have reported it contains caffeine, guarana and taurine, which are ingredients commonly found in energy drinks. You won’t find that information on their website.

This suspect product has no clear health value. It is falsely held up to be chocolate, when it is a powerful stimulant. And they market it like a drug – and they tell users to take it like a drug, by snorting it. It is crystal clear that the FDA needs to wake up and launch a formal investigation into so-called Coco Loko before too many of our young people are damaged by it. ‘Coco Loko’ isn’t even pure chocolate at all. Instead, it is chock full of concentrated energy drink ingredients masked and marketed under the innocence of natural and safe chocolate candy. Parents and doctors don’t want kids snorting anything at all, especially not dangerous stimulants proven to wreak havoc on the bodies and brains of young kids and teens. That’s why the FDA must formally investigate this dangerous ‘party goer’ fad before it hurts our kids, not after.

The Washington Post reported in July of 2017 the FDA had not decided on how or whether to regulate the product. An FDA spokesperson said: “In reaching that decision, FDA will need to evaluate the product labeling, marketing information, and/or any other information pertaining to the product’s intended use.” Thus the changes in product effects on the website. The company is trying to keep under the FDA’s radar A representative for the DEA said he was not aware of any agency concerns with chocolate inhalants. According to reports mentioned by Schumer, the Legal Lean said the effects were “equal to about two energy drinks.”

Anderson said he didn’t consult any medical professionals when he created Coco Loko, “nor have scientists tested the snortable snuff before it was released to the public,” according to Rolling Stone. A company spokesperson said they used research data on the market in Europe. “There are no health issues … everyone seems fine. . . . It says not to do more than half the container, I think everything is self-explanatory, there are warning labels on it and I don’t think I would be responsible.”

There have been previous concerns raised about the health effects of energy drinks containing the ingredients reported to be in Coco Loko— caffeine, taurine and guarana. There can be increased blood pressure or heart palpitations. Those effects could be magnified when someone inhales these stimulants. The director for the John Hopkins Sinus Center said as yet, there is no data reported on health consequences, but he did have a few concerns.

First, it’s not clear how much of each ingredient would be absorbed into the nasal mucus membranes. And, well, putting solid material into your nose — you could imagine it getting stuck in there, or the chocolate mixing with your mucus to create a paste that could block your sinuses.

Another sinus specialist, Dr. Jordan Josephson, said you could expect more pulmonary problems like asthma or bronchitis. Blocked sinuses could lead to snoring and even sleep apnea, which in some cases could be fatal. There are multiple social media and online reports of trying snortable chocolate products like Coco Loko.

Hopefully, this product will go the way of Palcohol, a powered alcohol product that Senator Schumer took on in 2015. As with Coco Loko, his concern was it would be marketed to teens. One of the voiced concerns then was that powered alcohol could be snorted. According to The Hill, the manufacturer of Palcohol fought back by saying: “Listen, people can snort black pepper … so do we ban it? No, just because a few goofballs use a product irresponsibly doesn’t mean you ban it.” The company reported that although its product was approved on March 10, 2015 for legal sale in the US, it would not be manufacturing Palcohol. Rather, it would be “auctioning off the secret formula and manufacturing process.” Let’s hope Coco Loko ends up with a similar fate. For more on Palcohol, see: “Hype Over Powered Alcohol” or “Down For The Count?”

P.S. On December 11, 2017 the FDA took action against Legal Lean for its marketing and distribution of two of its products, Coco Loco and Legal Lean Syrup. “The warning letter explains how the claims made in the promotional materials for Legal Lean Syrup and Coco Loko demonstrate that the products are intended to be used as alternatives to illicit street drugs and that the products, as labeled and marketed, may pose safety concerns.” The FDA warning letter stated that Coco Loko was labeled as a food and marketed as a dietary supplement on the company website. However, since it is intended for intranasal administration, it is not a food or dietary supplement. “Failure to correct violations may result in FDA enforcement action, including seizure or injunction, without further notice.”