Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Update On FDA Caffeine/Alcohol Ultimatum

By

caffeine
As reported last Friday, the FDA announced that they’d sent letters to almost 30 manufacturers of alcohol drinks that also contain caffeine. The FDA gave these companies 30 days to essentially prove that they’re safe. On the beer side, some of the breweries that received letters include Ithaca Beer Co. (Ithaca Eleven Malt Beverage with Coffee), New Century Brewing (Moonshot) and Thomas Creek Brewery (Mobius Lager). Here’s the full list.

My friend and colleague, Harry Schuhmacher, who writes Beer Business Daily, has some interesting insights into this move by the FDA. Beer Business Daily reports daily on the beer business. If you don’t subscribe to it, you should, especially if you’re a brewery owner or work for one on the business side.

Here’s his take on a few relevant portions of the FDA letter.

FDA: “FDA has not made a determination regarding the GRAS status [GRAS stands for ‘generally regarded as safe’] of the use of caffeine in alcoholic beverages.”

BBD: True, although the FDA has determined that caffeine, even in doses much higher than what are in the alcohol beverages in question, isn’t unsafe. The fact is that caffeine and alcohol have been mixed safely for hundreds of years. But does that mean that the manufacturer should do it for us? Read on.

FDA: “Nor are we aware of a basis for concluding that your use of caffeine in these beverages is prior sanctioned.”

BBD: This doesn’t make sense to us at first blush. The TTB, the federal agency charged by the FAA Act with regulating alcoholic beverages, has certainly “sanctioned” these products by their approval of their formulas, their labels, and even vetted their marketing practices. The TTB has guidelines about adding caffeine to alcohol beverages — ironically based on FDA guidelines on caffeine — and all of the products on the market fall within these guidelines. In fact, these beverages are at caffeine levels well below what the FDA deems as unsafe. So while these beverages haven’t received prior sanction from the FDA, they have received a sort of de facto “sanction” from the TTB, which is just as much a part of the United States government as the FDA.

The crux here I suppose is in the idea of caffeine + alcohol. The FDA operates under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, while the TTB operates under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act. FDA governs food and non-alc beverages (and caffeine in such), while the TTB governs beverage alcohol. Methinks there is a land grab going on here, and the TTB isn’t too pleased about it, we hear. The FDA says it has jurisdiction because the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act gives it authority over “articles used for food or drink” and “thus includes alcoholic beverages,” says the FDA. This is probably news to the TTB.

The FDA has guidelines for caffeine in non-alc beverages, and the TTB has guidelines for alcohol in general. So the TTB naturally put the FDA caffeine guidelines with their alcohol guidelines, looked at the products in question, and deemed them safe. But the FDA is now reaching out beyond its historical bounds by placing the onus on the bev-alc manufacturers to prove that putting alcohol and caffeine together in one beverage is safe. More on that below.

He’s been inundated with questions and earlier today gave his thoughts to the most popular ones. With his permission, here are several of the questions and his answers to them:

WHAT’S THE DEAL? The FDA, under pressure from several state Attorneys General (who we hasten to add could make these drinks illegal in their respective states tomorrow either through legislation, regulatory ruling, and/or by AG fiat, but would rather make the feds do the heavy lifting) is formally tackling the issue of caffeine intentionally added to alcohol beverages. It says it has providence when a food or beverage intentionally adds a substance to it that is “unsafe” unless its use has been approved by the FDA, is generally recognized as safe (as caffeine is), or is “subject to a prior sanction.” If the additive is “unapproved” then it is subject to “seizure” if deemed unsafe. The FDA has not “issued a food additive regulation to approve the use of caffeine in alcoholic beverages, and FDA is not aware of a basis to conclude that this use of caffeine is GRAS or subject to a prior sanction by FDA. By law, any person can make a GRAS determination but that determination must meet the GRAS criteria for safety and general recognition.” In other words, call in your best lawyers, because this is going to be a legal war of words just as much as it is a scientific one.

Historically, the FDA has listed caffeine as generally safe in cola-type beverages in lower doses, but there are no “regulations that permit the addition of caffeine, at any level, in alcoholic beverages.” That doesn’t mean it’s unsafe, it just means there aren’t any regulations. But as we mentioned above, the TTB has guidelines, based on the fact that the FDA hasn’t deemed caffeine as unsafe even in larger doses. Can you say turf war? In fact, the FDA and the TTB have a “Memorandum of Understanding” between them outlining what actions each should take under certain circumstances when there is overlap in their jurisdiction. We quote from it: “When FDA learns or is advised that an alcoholic beverage is or may be adulterated, FDA will contact ATF [Ed. Note: that’s the old name for the TTB].” The memorandum unhappily doesn’t mention what happens when a seemingly safe substance like caffeine has found to be “adulterating” alcoholic drinks. One would think the action would be the same as for other alleged adulterations: FDA should contact the TTB, make them aware of it, and let them take care of it. Instead they called a press conference. Politics are involved as usual, and we’ll get to that.

The FDA says it is “unaware of the basis upon which manufacturers may have concluded that the use of caffeine in alcoholic beverages is” generally recognized as safe. But I know of one basis: the fact that the TTB says it was okay. The two agencies must not read each other’s websites. I hear the Internets are slow this time of year in DC. But still, the FDA says that in order for caffeine AND alcohol together to be classified as “Generally Regarded as Safe”, even if they’re safe apart, it must past two tests: 1. Publicly available science must show that caffeine in alcohol is safe, and 2. there is a “consensus among qualified experts regarding the safety of caffeine for this use.” In other words, what the FDA is trying to do is come up with a new substance it can regulate, a substance that is the combination of both caffeine and alcohol. We can call it CafAlc. And CalfAlc, the FDA says, needs to be classified under FDA rules as GRAS or sanctioned. Here’s my beef with this reasoning: If CalfAlc comes under FDA jurisdiction, does that mean that plain old “Alc” isn’t too far behind? Slippery slopes and victory by inches, my friends.

[Ed. Note: This isn’t the first time the FDA has reached into the alcohol beverage business. Because of the strict legal wording of the what the TTB has authority over, gluten free beers like A-B’s Redbridge and Saki fall under FDA authority, because of how they’re made. Technically, it’s legal for gluten free beers to have slotting fees, as a result].

This is extremely unusual. The last time the FDA formally asked a manufacturer to prove their substance is GRAF was back in 2001, when it asked the manufacturers of Echinacea to prove it was GRAS or prior sanctioned for use in conventional foods. So this is a bid deal.

WHAT ABOUT KAHLUA AND CUBA LIBRES? This was a common cry from distributors. Consumers and manufacturers have been mixing alcohol with caffeine for many years. “This FDA action is not directed at products that are flavored with coffee,” says the FDA. So Kahlua isn’t illegal ….. yet. Also, for the time being, the bartender that serves you a Jack and Coke is also safe from arrest, as the FDA is “focusing its attention on products in which caffeine has been intentionally added to alcoholic beverages by the manufacturers. Other products containing added caffeine may be subject to agency review if the available scientific data and information indicate that added caffeine may pose a safety concern, or is being unlawfully used, under the conditions of its use in other products.” So stay tuned. Cuba libres may be next.

HOW HARD IS IT TO GET GRAS STATUS? The FDA says that there must be “technical evidence of safety and a basis to conclude that this evidence is generally known and accepted by qualified experts.” That includes establishing that the beverage’s “intended use” be safe and that it’s not harmful under “probable consumption” and the “cumulative effect of the ingredient in the diet.”

This is kind of bizarre, because as we’ve said, caffeine hasn’t been deemed unsafe. But there’s a reason that alcohol is regulated by a different agency, because by its very nature it is a different type of product — it can be intoxicating — and as such the guidelines of “safe” are a different animal. Here’s my point: If there was no such thing as alcohol on earth, and an alien suddenly landed in Des Moines and introduced the miracle of vodka to us, I doubt the FDA would approve it as GRAS. But the fact remains that alcohol has been on earth for thousands of years, and the voters won’t be denied it. The government once tried to “take away its GRAS status” in 1919, but that didn’t work out so well. We’ll let the lawyers grapple with that. We are in unchartered territory, and while we’re not talking about alcohol alone, but rather CafAlc, the consequences of going down this legal road could still be significant to the industry at large. If CafAlc is deemed unsafe by our protectors at the FDA, and yet caffeine is considered safe, then where does that leave Alc?

WHAT’S THE TIME FRAME? While the FDA gives the producers of these beverages 30 short Winter days to prove they are safe, it gives itself an indeterminate amount of Summer days to respond. “The timeframe is difficult to predict and it will depend on the amount and quality of data and information that the FDA receives from manufacturers and that are otherwise available to the agency and upon the complexity of scientific issues that may be encountered in the course of its review,” writes the FDA. “The FDA’s decision regarding the regulatory status of caffeine added to various alcoholic beverages will be a high priority for the agency; however, a decision regarding the use of caffeine in alcoholic beverages could take some time.”

BIG BREWERS’ HAND IN THIS? A few readers have suggested that A-B and MillerCoors probably have a hand in these latest developments, as it would kill a growing competitive threat while also fitting their crowns with bright white halos (and the added “benefit” of putting the NBWA on its heels). Perhaps, but there are several competing factors in that equation. You can imagine that their marketing people aren’t unhappy about what’s happened, as these indie manufacturers were operating under the radar and taking share and shelf space from castrated Sparks and Tilt. And at the same time I don’t think their government affairs people, who trump almost everything at both those companies, like having any malt-based products out there that cast a bad light on the industry at large — it puts a tax and regulation target on everybody’s back. Still, I also don’t think they’re particularly happy about the FDA getting into the alcohol business. I happen to know that they haven’t been in contact with the FDA about it, in fact. But they do seem to favor federal regulation over state-based regulation. So take all that for what it’s worth.

OUR TAKE. So what’s likely to happen? That’s anybody’s guess, as you can never predict what government agencies will do. But that won’t stop us from conjecturing. The larger producers will likely fold like lawn chairs on Labor Day. Constellation already killed their caffeinated alcohol drink, even though it’s still listed in the FDA’s hit list. I expect Diageo will kill Smirnoff Raw Tea in about sixty seconds if they haven’t already (one source says they already discontinued Raw Tea), as they also want that white halo that A-B and MC have. We note Boston Beer’s Twisted Tea didn’t get a love letter from the FDA.

The smaller producers like Four Loko and Joose, who have everything to lose, have already lawyered up, we hear. One thing that jumps out at us is that 30 days is a ridiculously short time frame for the FDA to expect anybody to prepare a defense. They’ll get extensions on that, you can almost be sure. And you have to think they may have a pretty decent case. There’s no evidence we’ve seen that caffeine and alcohol are dangerous to your health per se, or any more dangerous than either one apart. People have been quaffing rum and Cokes for years. The evidence will be vetted, and in the end, if indeed caffeine and alcohol aren’t any worse for you than drinking coffee and vodka separately, or together to your health, then the FDA will ultimately be satisfied and can report back to the AGs that they did their job.

But I think this is important: The FDA cites a letter provided by the AGs of a group of university scientists showing evidence that alcohol and caffeine may keep people up longer into the night, so there’s more of a chance of them consuming more and getting into dangerous mischief. But one would think this is beyond the scope of the FDA. They’re food regulators, not behavior police. Also, the fact that these products are high in alcohol and taste sweet, and so could be construed to appeal to young people, would also seem to be out of the FDA’s wheelhouse. But I’m no Perry Mason.

THE COLD HARD TRUTH. Having said all that, the fact remains that the Big Boys in our industry — brewers and distillers alike — in the alcohol industry don’t want these drinks to exist. Neither do the control states, neither do the license state regulators, neither do the AGs, neither do parents, neither do some chain retailers, and neither do the fun bunchers [Note: “fun bunchers” is Harry’s term for neo-prohibitionists —J]. These products have been painted with a tar brush — nobody wants to touch them. Even if Joose and Four Loko have great legal representation, there are a lot of big forces against them, including the beer, wine, and spirits industry at large in which they operate. While they may have a legal case against the FDA, this tide is a strong one to swim against.

Worst case scenario for these producers: Caffeine and taurine and other stimulants are deemed to be dangerous in conjunction with alcohol, so Joose and Four Loko and their ilk will have to reformulate without stimulants, but with other vitamins or whatever, and ultimately they get placed on the same playing field as Sparks and Tilt, and we move on down the road. Book it.

Beer In Art #52: Ernst Henseler’s Beer Evening

By

art-beer
Today’s work of art is straight out of Germany’s history pages, and in fact I found it at the German History in Documents and Images website. It was by a relatively obscure German artist named Ernst Henseler. About all I could find out about him is that he was born in 1852 and died in 1940. Though I called it “Beer Evening” above, today’s painting is really titled Bismarck in Conversation with Reichstag Deputies at a Parliamentary Soirée and is believed to have been painted in 1894.

Ernest Hensler: Beer Evening
The painting is an illustration for the section of the GHDI entitled “Forging an Empire: Bismarckian Germany (1866-1890)” and under the sub-heading “Parties and Political Mobilization.” This also included the following description of the events in the painting:

This painting by Ernst Henseler (b. 1852) shows a parliamentary “beer evening” in the Imperial chancellery. These soirées provided Bismarck with an opportunity to convince parliamentary friends and foes alike that his policies deserved support. Sometimes consensus-building flowed in the opposite direction. Note that beer was more plentiful than food on such occasions, perhaps to the disappointment of one of Bismarck’s dogs, who was also on the invitation list.

Fun With Science: Beer Can Robug

By

science
This morning, my son Porter and I finally got around to building the Kids Lab science project that he got for his birthday back in September. It was a Soda Can Robug, but since we’re a soda-free household, we used a beer can instead.
beer-robug
Porter showing off his Beer Can Robug, made with Ukiah Pilsner.

Pete Brown On Beer Marketing

By

While you should know Pete Brown from his books, especially what is arguably the best beer book of the year, Hops and Glory, he began his career in marketing and worked on several high-profile ad campaigns for well-known beer brands. On Wednesday in the UK’s Daily Mail, Pete had an interesting article giving his perspective on the present state of beer marketing. It’s entitled “The rise and fall of Britain’s favourite beers: Why brewers are desperate for us to spend £4 on a pint of lager”. Although it details British ad campaigns you may not be familiar with, it’s still worth a read, as many of the points he makes I think are universal.

Bistro Barrel Aged Fest Serves Over 70 Beers

By

bistro
Today in Hayward, California, the Bistro held their 4th annual Barrel Aged Beer Fest, serving a record number of beers for any festival they’ve thrown, with over 70 beers. The weather couldn’t have been more perfect for drinking extreme beers and there were some wonderful examples there. While I wasn’t able to try them all, here are a few of my favorites, in no particular order:

  • Bear Republic Blackberry Grizz: Slightly sour nose but the tart blackberries really come through wonderfully to pair with rich malt.
  • Lagunitas Crusin’ with Ruben & the Bretts on Cherries: An oh-so-smooth imperial stout finished off with cherries the final three months. Chocolately with tart cherry flavors. Just delicious.
  • Marin Old Dipsea Barleywine Arne Johnson’s barleywine tasting as good as ever.
  • Fifty Fifty Imperial Eclipse Stout 2008 on Pappy Van Winkle Bourbon Barrel: One of the best imperial stouts I’ve tasted on a long time, the barrel flavors are pitch perfect.
  • Avery Voltron: A blend of five different barrel aged beers, so good they probably could defend the universe like its cartoon namesake, Voltron.
  • Black Diamond Imperial Porter: This may be brewer Derrick Smith’s best beer to date. Brewed with cocoa nibs and vanilla beans, the nose is all milk chocolate. With complex spicy flavors that mix well with the overall chocolateyness (not a real word) of the flavor profile, this is a terrific beer for sipping by a warming fire. It reminds so much of hot chocolate for adults, that now I’m curious if you could mull it like Unibroue’s Quelque Chose.
  • Sierra Nevada Scotch on Scotch: Sierra Nevada continues to impress with their range of different experimental and special beers. This Scotch “wee heavy” was aged in a Glengoyne Scotch barrel to give it amazing complexity. A true sipping beer.
  • Moylan’s Wet Hopsickle 2009: A fresh hop beer aged in a Chardonnay barrel. The oak and Chardonnay notes work really nicely with the strong hop character to create some very unique flavors.
  • Russian River Consecration: One of my favorites of the newer Russian River beers, though Supplication was tasting pretty good, too.
  • Valley Brewing Bourbon Barrel Old Inventory Barley Wine: Steve’s award-winning barley wine, still tasting great.

Craig Cauwels, from Schooner's, with Vic Krajl
Craig Cauwels, from Schooner’s, with Vic Krajl, co-owner of the Bistro.

Below is a slideshow of the Bistro Barrel Aged Beer Fest. This Flickr gallery is best viewed in full screen. To view it that way, after clicking on the arrow in the center to start the slideshow, click on the button on the bottom right with the four arrows pointing outward on it, to see the photos in glorious full screen. Once in full screen slideshow mode, click on “Show Info” to identify each photo.

Hindenburg Beer Auctioned For £10,000

By

zeppelin
The bottle of Lowenbrau beer that survived the crash of the Hindenburg, that I wrote about on Tuesday, was auctioned earlier today, fetching the sum of £9,400, but “with buyer’s premium, the bottle will cost the purchaser £10,810,” or around $18.034. This Is Wiltshire, like most accounts, is claiming “[t]he world record price for a bottle of beer was smashed in Devizes today when a bottle of Lowebrau lager sold for over £10,000. The previous highest price for a single bottle of beer is thought to be around £2,500 and auctioneer Alan Aldridge started bidding at £3,000.” But I continue to be perplexed by the August 2007 sale of a bottle Allsopp’s Arctic Ale that sold on eBay for $503,300. No one has mentioned it at all, though it was widely reported at the time.

hindenburg-beer
The Lowenbrau bottle that sold today for £10,810.

UPDATE: Whew, finally an answer on the Allsopp eBay sale. It turns out to be a typo, according to New Life Auctions, who looked into the sale. That and a decidedly unfunny joke bid, by a person with “no intention of paying the seller.” And I always thought a winning bid was akin to a “legal contract.” Antique Week has a little more the incident. Thanks to an alert Bulletin reader named Michael for setting the record straight, once and for all.

Pinhead Drinking Statistics By Media Ignore Reality

By

graphchart
The e-mail newsletter sent out Tuesday by Join Together, the anti-alcohol center at Columbia University, included a summary of an item in the USA Today from November 3, entitled Beer With Extra Buzz On Tap Up To 16%. Join Together’s emphasis on the article is about “More States Allowing High-Alcohol Beer” and similarly the USA Today article takes a cautionary tone as it starts out stating that a “growing number of states are moving to allow higher alcohol content in beer, despite concerns from some substance-abuse experts.” While admitting that 20 states “still place some kind of limit on the amount of alcohol in beer,” the recent changes to the alcohol laws in several states, such as Alabama, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia, and others, are worrying the usual anti-alcohol folks.

Although they did talk to Paul Gatza from the Brewers Association, most of the voices in the article were from neo-prohibitionist groups expressing their “concerns.” For example, “David Rosenbloom, president of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University in N.Y., said the more alcohol, ‘the faster you get drunk and the longer you stay drunk. … There’s no evidence that people will drink less, or fewer beers.’ And here’s Chuck Hurley, CEO of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, who said, “Our chief concern is that (higher-alcohol brews) be properly labeled so people understand it takes fewer beers to become intoxicated.”

But here’s why this is a non-story and why author Jessica Leving needs to go back to J-school. What’s not mentioned in this article is that wine and hard liquor, already much stronger than beer, in some cases many times stronger, is already available in those same states who’ve recently raised the allowable alcohol percentage for beer. Higher alcohol drinks have been available since at least 1933, and no doubt for a long time prior to 1920. That an infinitesimal portion of total beer sales can now include some higher alcohol ones is all but meaningless in that light. If someone wanted higher alcohol there’s been no shortage of opportunities for them to find such drinks. When this has come up before, the argument by Anti-Alcohol for why this matters is that more underage people drink beer. But that’s just propaganda. All people drink more beer than wine and spirits, so there’s nothing sinister or unique about beer and underage drinking. In fact, studies by neo-prohibitionist groups reveal that young people really prefer sweeter drinks, like wine and cocktails made with higher alcohol beverages.

The higher alcohol beers they’re all in a panic about are most often more bitter than the average young palate prefers. Those beers are the ones that a small percentage of the population — the beer geeks — want. Sales of those beers as compared to beer’s total is very, very small, I’d wager, and against all alcohol, virtually infinitesimal. So how was that ignored and this non-story published in a national newspaper? How was Rosenbloom allowed to get away with saying “[t]here’s no evidence that people will drink less, or fewer beers” when that’s clearly not true? Simple. Media outlets sell more papers or airtime or whatever by scaring the public and telling stories about what they should fear. What I fear is the lack of truth that accompanies these stories every time they’re told. Despite the fact that Leving at least (unlike many others) tried to include contrary opinions, the piece ends up just giving voice to the anti-alcohol agenda, while not asking the most basic questions that show that agenda to be riddled with misinformation and propaganda.

Subsequent Stumbling Session Scheduled

By

session-the
The topic of our next Session has been announced and it’s Stumbling Home. Our host for Session #34, James Davoli at Two Parts Rye, describes what he means by that:

It’s time to give a shout out to your favorite watering hole. How good are the beers? Any interesting cast of characters? What are your drinking buddies like? They probably need to be embarrassed on the internet. Now’s the time.

You don’t have to limit yourself to one. Feel free to reminisce about the good old days if you like. Maybe you are a shut-in like this guy, and don’t get out that much, talk about the home bar.

There is a catch. This booze stuff has interesting side effects. That means, you can’t get behind the wheel. You gotta walk, take public transportation, or be a regular supporter of your favorite taxi company. Bicycles are acceptable but you still need to be careful. I have the cracked helmet and scars to prove it. Gotta love the 5 mph one man crash.

Walk back home by December 4 and let us know what you stumbled upon.

FDA Gives Alcohol/Caffeine Drinks 30 Days To Prove It’s Safe

By

caffeine
The FDA announced today that they’ve sent a letter to almost 30 manufacturers of alcohol drinks that also contain caffeine. The FDA is giving these companies 30 days to essentially prove that they’re safe. The move is undoubtedly motivated by a bullying letter sent to the FDA in September by 18 state Attorneys General. That letter was itself the product of pressure brought to bear by neo-prohibitionist groups at the state and local level.

From the press release:

“The increasing popularity of consumption of caffeinated alcoholic beverages by college students and reports of potential health and safety issues necessitates that we look seriously at the scientific evidence as soon as possible,” said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, principal deputy commissioner of food and drugs.

Of the combined use of caffeine and alcohol among U.S. college students in the few studies on this topic, the prevalence was as high as 26 percent.

Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, a substance added intentionally to food (such as caffeine in alcoholic beverages) is deemed “unsafe” and is unlawful unless its particular use has been approved by FDA regulation, the substance is subject to a prior sanction, or the substance is Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS). FDA has not approved the use of caffeine in alcoholic beverages and thus such beverages can be lawfully marketed only if their use is subject to a prior sanction or is GRAS. For a substance to be GRAS, there must be evidence of its safety at the levels used and a basis to conclude that this evidence is generally known and accepted by qualified experts.

The FDA alerted manufacturers to the fact that the agency is considering whether caffeine can lawfully be added to alcoholic beverages. The FDA noted that it is unaware of the basis upon which manufacturers may have concluded that the use of caffeine in alcoholic beverages is GRAS or prior sanctioned. To date, the FDA has only approved caffeine as an additive for use in soft drinks in concentrations of no greater than 200 parts per million. It has not approved caffeine for use at any level in alcoholic beverages.

The FDA requested that, within 30 days, the companies produce evidence of their rationale, with supporting data and information, for concluding that the use of caffeine in their product is GRAS or prior sanctioned. FDA’s letter informed each company that if FDA determines that the use of caffeine in the firm’s alcoholic beverages is not GRAS or prior sanctioned, FDA will take appropriate action to ensure that the products are removed from the marketplace.

Notice that the press release outlines the rationale for the safety check because of “increasing popularity” by “college students” along with “reports of potential health and safety issues,” also known as anecdotes and stories people made up to scare other people. That’s about as flimsy a reason as I can imagine. They don’t seem concerned about older adults, us post-college folks which suggests to me that it’s not really about safety at all.

I think what bothers me about this is simply how obviously it’s the FDA bowing to pressure from anti-alcohol groups. Last time I checked, caffeine was legal. Alcohol is also legal if you’re the “right” age. People have been drinking alcohol and caffeine concurrently, myself included, for centuries. I’m drinking Tejava (my daily ritual) as I write this and by lunchtime I’ll be ready for a beer, followed by more caffeine this afternoon to fend off the mid-afternoon urge to nap. More recently — though even this was years ago — Red Bull and vodka became a very popular cocktail, mixing the two chemicals caffeine and alcohol. Certain people were worried then, too, but I’ve never heard of any real danger posed from that drink and the many imitations and variations it spawned. Even if they banned every alcohol and caffeine drink, people can, and probably will, go right on mixing them on their own. What’s to stop them? Actually, banning them would likely cause an increase in combination drinking, because people love a taboo.

All that would happen, really, is the harming of a few dozen alcohol companies, which I suspect is the Anti-Alcohols (or AnAl’s) game. Even in the unlikely event that they declare the pairing of the two substances a danger, it won’t, and they can’t, stop people from mixing them on their own. Even if it was made illegal, people would never stop having a few drinks followed by a cup of coffee. It’s absurd, really, like they’re trying to remake the world in the image of a Kafka novel.

Drinking Life & Limb

By

sierra-nevada dogfish
You probably remember the big news back in August when Dogfish Head and Sierra Nevada announced they’d be doing not one, but two collaboration beers. The main one is called Life & Limb, while the second is Limb & Life, a small beer made from the second runnings of Life & Limb.

To launch the new collaboration, a beer dinner was held last Sunday at Ana Mandara in San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf. Both Sam Calagione, from Dogfish Head and Ken Grossman, from Sierra Nevada were on hand for the dinner.

Hosts Ken Grossman & Sam Calagione
Ken Grossman and Sam Calagione

Limb & Life, the draft-only “Imperial small beer,” was served with hors d’oeuvres while Ken and Sam talked about their collaboration together.

The five-course meal had two beers paired with each dish, one from each brewery. We started with Limb & Life and then Life & Limb was served as the last beer of the evening, with dessert. In addition, at the end of the night we finagled a bottle of Life & Limb to compare with the draft version. Personally, I preferred the bottle. Bottle-conditioning gave it a richer mouthfeel and added complexity.

I was fortunate to sit with Sam and Ken for the dinner, as they discussed the project. While Sam has done many collaborations with both domestic and foreign breweries over the years, this was Sierra Nevada’s first one. If you can find a copy of All About Beer magazine from around this time last year, you can read my feature story on collaboration beers. I love the growing trend of collaboration beers, especially when, like this one, some thought is put into it. This makes the results more meaningful, and not simply a marketing effort. Everything about it was well done, especially the artwork for the label, done by a children’s book illustrator.

Life & Limb label artwork

Below is a slideshow of the Life & Limb beer dinner. This Flickr gallery is best viewed in full screen. To view it that way, after clicking on the arrow in the center to start the slideshow, click on the button on the bottom right with the four arrows pointing outward on it, to see the photos in glorious full screen. Once in full screen slideshow mode, click on “Show Info” to identify each photo.