Latin American context
Latin America has shown a majority trend towards the restrictive and vertical regulation of energy drinks through individual and specific regulatory frameworks applicable to beverages that contain caffeine (generally with an upper limit of 320 and up to 350mg / L), amino acids such as taurine (also with upper limits of 4000 mg / L) and other ingredients such as Group-B vitamins, glucuronolactone and other additives or ingredients with various functionalities, from technological food to nutritional or physiological
functionality.
In addition to the regulatory frameworks, there are prior approval processes for each SKU, for the purposes of placing any energy drink on the market, as well as other beverages and solid foods. That is, typically, the health authorities of each country, such as Argentina, Peru, Colombia, Panama, etc., issue a certificate of approval of a food product, which deals with its qualitative-quantitative formula, its labeling, certificates of origin. , etc. This facilitates an exhaustive control of each drink, brand, formulation, origin and safety / functionality in question.
Regulations in countries such as Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, among others, maintain maximum caffeine concentration requirements within 320 mg / L, with the only exception of Brazil, which has a slightly higher limit, at 350 mg / L, but that practically guarantees a comparable amount of caffeine that is around 80mg per 250ml can, which is equivalent to a coffee made at home, in terms of caffeine content.
Energy drinks are then regulated in depth, with legislative or regulatory frameworks that are presented as the most demanding, rigorous and restrictive in the world, if we take into account that the regulated product presents ubiquitous characteristics such as its caffeine or sugar content, however the weight of regulatory frameworks has been comparatively much more demanding on energy drinks than on similar products, such as coffee. BEAL does not necessarily disagree with several of the aforementioned regulatory frameworks, but the foregoing is noted for the purpose of providing perspective.