That's a misleading statement. Nobody has ever "OD'ed on water". Death by an overfilled bladder can be accomplished with any liquid. If you replace the substance and retain the symptom, it's not that substance's fault. Energy drinks contain ingredients which are demonstrably harmful. Your post suggests a situation where people are aware of those dangers, but the issue at hand has more to do with the kind of situation I've detailed below:
The inverse dilemma, is a situation wherein parents simply don't know the dangers of excessive energy drink consumption, and see no problem with letting their child drink two or three a day. The child's well-being shouldn't be ignored due to the ignorance of the parent.
Prohibition of a substance has never been a successful strategy, so we can ignore that option. If it can be found that there is a stage in child development where energy drink consumption elicits a noticeably adverse effect, then you have a case for an age limitation based on that upper-range. But regardless of whether such a limitation can be implemented, what must be pursued is a public campaign of awareness, so that people do know the harmful effects energy drinks can have on the body.
Bookmarks