Pediatricians say kids, teens should avoid sports and energy drinks

Kids and teens should not drink sports or energy drinks, the Canadian Paediatric Society says in a new position released Tuesday that takes a stand against the sugary beverages.

Dr. Catherine Pound, co-author of the statement and a pediatrician at the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, says caffeinated energy drinks in particular can pose serious health risks and are unnecessary for most young people.

“I wouldn’t recommend them for anybody that fits our target population, which is anyone between the ages of zero and 18,” said Pound, noting that one can of energy drink contains more caffeine than the regular type of brewed coffee.

Too much can be deadly, as apparently was the case of a South Carolina teen who collapsed April 26 after downing an energy drink, a large pop and a cafe latte within a two-hour span.

Davis Cripe had no pre-existing heart condition but likely died from a caffeine-induced heart arrhythmia, said the local coroner.

The Canadian Paediatric Society had no official position on the use of energy and sports drinks at the time, however had suggested young non-athletes avoid them.

It now explicitly makes the case against both caffeinated energy drinks and non-caffeinated sports drinks among youth, suggesting there are very few who would need such stimulants.

“A lot of people believe they’re essential as part of rehydration for sports. But what we’re finding is actually they’re not — water is ideal for rehydration in sport,” said Pound, adding that doctors should routinely screen for their use.

“Only in the very specific subset of the population will they be useful and that’s the population of children that will perform very vigorous activity for over an hour or in very hot and humid weather.”

The other danger is mixing energy drinks with alcohol, said Pound, adding that those who do so tend to participate in highrisk behaviour such as illicit drug use.

Caffeinated energy drinks claim to boost energy, reduce fatigue and improve concentration. The amount of caffeine typically exceeds Health Canada’s maximum daily intake for kids.

Pound cautioned against side effects, which include difficulty sleeping, increased anxiety, heart rhythm abnormalities, vomiting and diarrhea.

Sports drinks, which contain a mixture of sugars and electrolytes, are often marketed as fluid replacements during sports or vigorous physical activity.

But statement co-author Becky Blair, a member of Dietitians of Canada, said these drinks contribute to obesity and dental cavities.

“It’s just really an extra source of calories for children that they don’t need,” said Blair, who’d like to see legislation to prevent marketing of caffeinated energy drinks to children and adolescents.

“All they really need for hydration is just drinking water and eating a balanced diet.”

Pound said it’s worth considering an even tougher stand against energy drinks, musing on the value of restricting use to adults, like alcohol: “I don’t think it would be a bad idea at all.”

VANCOUVER

The amount of public money parties would receive under British Columbia’s new campaign finance rules before the next provincial election is virtually identical to the amount political donors received in tax benefits between the last two elections, an analysis of the two systems shows.

The province’s new NDP government is experiencing a backlash after flip-flopping on its campaign promise not to use public money to fund political parties, but an analysis by The Canadian Press shows the payout under the proposed system for a per-vote subsidy mirrors what is already happening.

Based on the results of May’s election, the three major political parties would receive $16.36 million in subsidies before the next election scheduled for 2021 under the new system.

The analysis of Elections BC data reveals the province would have paid out nearly that same amount — $16.31 million — in tax benefits to subsidize contributions made to political parties from donors, which include individuals, corporations and trade unions.

The subsidies proposed by the NDP have been described by Premier John Horgan as a transitional measure and would expire after five years.

The New Democrats also propose reimbursing parties and candidates up to 50 per cent of their election expenses if they receive at least 10 per cent of the vote, which amounts to about $11 million based on last May’s election.

B.C. and Alberta are the only two provinces without a system that partially reimburses individual candidates for their expenses.

Horgan rejected public funding for parties before the last election, saying any such proposal would first go to Elections BC and an independent committee for review.

Experts say while existing subsidies may be less obvious, a lot of public money already goes into political financing either through public finding or tax rebates.

But subsidizing parties on a pervote basis tends to attract attention from voters because it is more visible, said Robert MacDermid, a campaign finance expert at York University in Toronto.

“I think, as citizens, we would rather have money come out of the pool of taxpayers than come out of the pool of wealthy individuals or unions that have very specific interests to push. We should see that as a benefit,” he said.

In B.C., donors are eligible to claim 75 per cent on the first $100 donated, 50 per cent on any amount between $100 and $550, and 33.3 per cent for donations between $550 and $1,150. Benefits are capped at $500, which means contributions above $1,150 earn no additional tax benefit.

Those rules will not change with the passage of the new campaign finance bill.

The amount in tax benefits was calculated using campaign contribution data. Numbers provided by B.C.’s Finance Ministry confirm the general amounts.

A $16 million contribution planned for the NDP, Liberals and Greens amounts to 0.03 per cent of the province’s $51.9 billion budget.

“This is a tiny, tiny per cent, and it’s for ensuring that politicians rely less on the wealthy and so adopt the ideas of the wealthy. That is really the worry in campaign finance, translating the economic power that the wealthy have in the market into politics,” MacDermid said.