The company stated that a company, whether it be a Code Signatory or member of the Portman Group, should be able to trust that a ‘final’ decision was final. The company explained that should the same product be subject to complaints of the same nature on more than one occasion, businesses would find it impossible to make medium to long-term planning and investment decisions. One 250ml can of Red Bull Energy Drink contains 80 mg of caffeine, about the same amount as in a cup of home-brewed coffee. The caffeine content of the products was clearly stated and there was no indication the products were linked to potential therapeutic qualities, mood or behaviour changing capabilities or benefits (3.2(j) – link with therapeutic qualities).

The company explained that in 2015, Dragon Soop was fully investigated by the Independent Complaints Panel (Panel) under Code rules 3.2(f) and 3.2(h) which it found to not be in breach. The company highlighted that it had received a letter from the Chair of the Panel that there had not been any breach of the Code and that the decision was final. The company stated that NIADA could not claim to have knowledge of what ‘most young people’ did, as its day-to-day work and research was conducted with a very specific group of young people, all of whom had serious alcohol or substance abuse issues. The company explained that this research group could not in any way be seen to be representative of the population as a whole. The company argued that any extrapolations about the behaviour and attitudes of the wider population based on research carried out solely with this group would be skewed, misleading and far from impartial. The company concluded by stating that it was important as a self-regulatory body that the Portman Group continued to be seen by all its members as demonstrably fair and transparent. The company noted that the Portman Group was obliged to proceed against a member company or Code Signatory every time a company was accused of a breach of the rules; regardless of who had made the complaint or however credible the complaint was. The company also explained that the Portman Group proceeded with breach procedure, even if the company had previously been cleared of breaching those rules. The company stated that the Panel’s decisions had far reaching consequences, which could potentially lead to a Retailer Alert Bulletin which resulted in the removal of a brand from all retail shelves. Firstly, the company highlighted that NIADA had stated that it wished to submit “a complaint about caffeinated alcoholic drinks”, but that the organisation had only singled out Dragon Soop from a group of other caffeinated alcoholic drinks. The company stated that the organisation had done this based on the unscientific basis that Dragon Soop is what NIADA called “the more popular drink of choice.”

Contact Info

B-group vitamins: Vitamins are essential micronutrients that are required for maintaining normal body functions. Offshore Island deliveries will take longer than two days including Channel Islands, Isle of Man, Scottish Highlands and Islands and Scilly Isles. Under the ‘Health effects concerns’ paragraph of the complaint, the company highlighted that NIADA had stated that “so many young people are consuming this drink usually in large quantities.” The company stated that this claim was based on shaky evidence of one small focus group made up of young, often under-age, substance and alcohol abusers. The company stated that there was no proof that Dragon Soop was consumed in greater excess than any other alcoholic drink. Additionally, the company stated that young people who did consume alcohol in great excess might reasonably be supposed to consume any popular alcoholic drink in large quantities.

Alcohol can cause abnormal heart rhythms in the body, high blood pressure and can damage the heart muscle and cause other diseases such as strokes, liver problems and some cancers. Alcohol is also high in calories and can lead to weight gain and health-related issues in that sense (British Heart Foundation). Caffeine in large amounts can also have effects on the body and health, such as increased breathing and heart rate as well as increased mental activity and physical energy. The body can also become dependent on caffeine physically and psychologically and then feel withdrawal symptoms from it (Better Health Channel). Hence, excess levels of both can have adverse effects on health, especially young people. The company agreed that four participants in the focus group had provided quotes that demonstrated they used Dragon Soop irresponsibly, and for one participant, immoderately. However, the company stated that the participants in this focus group were young people with known alcohol abuse problems and so whichever alcoholic drink they chose, it would be likely that they would consume it irresponsibly and immoderately. The company stated that whilst their responses were wholly regrettable, they were not surprising and could not be admissible because they constituted a skewed unrepresentative sample. The company explained that if NIADA had put together a similar small sample group of its clients who preferred other types of alcohol such as rum, vodka or cider, and were then asked about their abuse of that drink, they would likely give similar answers. There was nothing on any of the products that encouraged consumers to drink irresponsibly or immoderately (3.2 (f) – encouragement of immoderate, irresponsible, illegal consumption). The Panel considered Dragon Soop Rhubarb and Custard and noted that the flavour was based on a traditional sweet and that the colour scheme of the pastel pink and yellow closely resembled these sweets. The Panel considered that there was a risk that this could have an appeal to under-18s. The Panel discussed a previous complaint case about Mr Gladstone’s Curious Emporium Range from 2017 which had a rhubarb and custard flavour. The Panel noted that the decision reflected that rhubarb and custard had a wide appeal and was not particularly appealing to under-18s. The Panel also noted that the decision noted a difference between using a sweet name as a flavour and marketing a drink in the context of sweets which Dragon Soop did not do. When considering the Dragon Soop Rhubarb and Custard flavour, the Panel concluded that the flavour had wide appeal and did not have a particular appeal to under-18s. A factual statement that a product contains a particular ingredient, for example high caffeine content, is unlikely in itself to be problematic under the Code.”The company then explained that since Dragon Soop had been launched in 2010 there had only been three complaints in the intervening 12 years (the complaint from 2015 which was considered against Dragon Soop Strawberry and Lime, which was found not to be in breach of the Code, and the other two which were currently subject to investigation.) The company stated that this was a remarkably low figure for a brand that sold 13.6 million cans per year. The company stated that it recognised that while each element of the marketing and design of Dragon Soop was important, the overall impression was the most important element to avoid direct or indirect particular appeal to under-18s. The Panel then considered specific flavour variants that it believed warranted further discussion, as the Panel considered that some flavour variants carried additional connotations that had not been captured in the Strawberry and Lime 2015 precedent or discussion so far.

The company stated that NIADA had made a number of unreliable observations, incorrect contentions and factual mistakes that the company wished to comment on.

FREE diet profile

There must be no undue emphasis on the drink’s higher alcoholic strength, or intoxicating effect – 3.2(a);