The Poison Squad: One Chemist's Single-Minded Crusade for Food Safety at the Turn of the Twentieth Century

The USDA’s objections to Coca Cola’s manufacturing practices centered primarily around the amount of caffeine contained in the final product. The department also believed that adverse psychological and physiological effects were likely to arise with excessive exposure. Also of concern were the conditions under which the syrup from which the drink was derived were produced. Observers, including Kebler, reported that the conditions were unsanitary; for example, the man in charge of mixing the syrup was pushing the crystalized caffeine powder into the vat with his bare, dirty feet. In line with one of Wiley’s closely held beliefs about transparency in advertising, many contended that the very name Coca-Cola was not only a misnomer, but intentionally deceptive. The soft drink no longer contained cocaine, but the name implied a mixed cocaine-caffeine blend.

The manufacturer and the USDA each presented witnesses to argue their positions, but the content of both sides’ testimony eventually mattered very little. Coca-Cola’s legal team argued that caffeine was an essential component of the recipe for Coca-Cola. They rationalized that caffeine should be considered neither an additive nor an adulterant used to mislead, mask, dilute, or preserve their product. As a key ingredient in their overall formula, it was outside the government’s purview to attempt to regulate its inclusion in the brand name soda.