![\"A](\"https:\/\/tribktla.files.wordpress.com\/2017\/07\/gettyimages-147874335.jpg?quality=85&strip=all&strip=all\")
<\/a><\/div>\nThe state keeps\u00a0a list of chemicals<\/a>\u00a0it considers possible causes of cancer, and one of them,\u00a0acrylamide<\/a>, is created when coffee beans are roasted.<\/p>\n A lawsuit first filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2010 by the nonprofit Council for Education and Research on Toxics targets several companies that make or sell coffee, including Starbucks, 7-Eleven and BP. The suit alleges that the defendants \u201cfailed to provide clear and reasonable warning\u201d that drinking coffee could expose people to acrylamide.<\/p>\n The court documents state that, under the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Proposition 65, businesses must give customers a \u201cclear and reasonable warning\u201d about the presence of agents that affect health\u00a0<\/strong>\u2014 and that these stores failed to do so.<\/p>\n In addition to paying fines, the lawsuit wants companies to post warnings about acrylamide with an explanation about the potential risks of drinking coffee. If the suit is successful, the signs would need to be clearly posted at store counters or on walls where someone could easily see them when making a purchase.<\/p>\n Raphael Metzger,<\/a>\u00a0the attorney representing the nonprofit, said it really wants the coffee companies to reduce the amount of the chemical to the point where there would be no significant cancer risk.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019m addicted to coffee, I confess, and I would like to be able to have mine without acrylamide,\u201d Metzger said.<\/p>\n At a bench trial last fall, the coffee companies argued that the\u00a0level of acrylamide\u00a0<\/a>in coffee should be considered safe under the law and that the health benefits of coffee essentially outweigh the risk.<\/p>\n At least 13 of the defendants have settled and agreed to give a warning, most recently 7-Eleven, according to Metzger. The convenience store chain did not respond to requests for comment.<\/p>\n The other manufacturers would have to follow suit if they don\u2019t settle the lawsuit and if the judge finds that they violated state laws. Metzger said private mediation with the remaining retailers is set for February 8. It will include nine of the defendants, and the parties will try to come to an agreement about\u00a0<\/strong>the case. Otherwise, a judge would probably reach a decision this year.<\/p>\n BP did not return requests for comment.<\/p>\n Starbucks referred questions to the\u00a0National Coffee Association<\/a>, the industry\u2019s trade association, which said it was not in a position to comment on the litigation.<\/p>\n Bill Murray, the association\u2019s president and CEO, said in a statement, \u201cCoffee has been shown, over and over again, to be a healthy beverage. The US Government\u2019s own Dietary Guidelines state that coffee can be part of a healthy lifestyle. This lawsuit simply confuses consumers, and has the potential to make a mockery of Prop 65 cancer warning at a time when the public needs clear and accurate information about health.\u201d<\/p>\n Coffee has been\u00a0much studied<\/a>\u00a0over the years, and research has shown that it\u00a0<\/strong>provides several health benefits,\u00a0including lowering your risk\u00a0<\/a>of early death. It may reduce your risk of\u00a0heart disease<\/a>,\u00a0multiple sclerosis<\/a>,\u00a0type 2 diabetes<\/a>,\u00a0Alzheimer\u2019s<\/a>\u00a0and even some cancers\u00a0like melanoma\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0prostate cancer.<\/a>\u00a0However, a review by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a branch of the World Health Organization, found that drinking\u00a0very hot beverages<\/a>\u00a0was \u201cprobably carcinogenic to humans\u201d due to burns to the esophagus; there was no relation to the chemical acrylamide.<\/p>\n The science on human exposure to acrylamide still needs \u201cfuture studies,\u201d\u00a0according to a 2014 review<\/a>\u00a0of scientific research on the chemical\u2019s relationship to a wide variety of cancers in the Journal of Nutrition and Cancer.<\/p>\n In addition to coffee,\u00a0acrylamide can be found<\/a>\u00a0in potatoes and baked goods like crackers, bread and cookies, breakfast cereal, canned black olives and prune juice, although its presence is not always labeled. It\u2019s in some food packaging and is a component of tobacco smoke. According to the National Cancer Institute, people are exposed to \u201csubstantially more acrylamide from tobacco smoke than from food.\u201d<\/p>\n In 2002, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified acrylamide as a group 2A carcinogen for humans based\u00a0on studies<\/a>\u00a0done\u00a0in animals<\/a>. Studies done on humans have found \u201cno statistically significant association between dietary acrylamide intake and various cancers,\u201d according to the 2014 research review.<\/p>\n A few additional\u00a0<\/strong>studies have seen an increased risk\u00a0for rena<\/a>l, ovarian and endometrial cancers; however, \u201cthe exposure assessment has been inadequate leading to potential misclassification or underestimation of exposure,\u201d according to the 2014 research review.<\/p>\n Even the studies showing cancer links between acrylamide in rats and mice used doses \u201c1,000 to 100,000 times higher than the usual amounts, on a weight basis, that humans are exposed to through dietary sources,\u201d the research review said.<\/p>\n Humans are also\u00a0thought to absorb<\/a>\u00a0acrylamide at different rates and to\u00a0metabolize it differently<\/a>\u00a0than rodents, earlier research showed.<\/p>\n The National Toxicology Program\u2019s Report on Carcinogens considers acrylamide to be \u201creasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.\u201d<\/p>\n The\u00a0Food and Drug Administration website<\/a>\u00a0says it \u201cis still in the information gathering stage\u201d on the chemical, but\u00a0the FDA gave\u00a0<\/a>consumers suggested ways to cut it out of their diet. The FDA also provided guidance to the industry intended to suggest a range of approaches companies could use to reduce acrylamide levels. The recommendations are only a guide and are \u201cnot required,\u201d\u00a0according to the website<\/a>.<\/p>\n California added acrylamide to its carcinogen list in January 1990, and the state has successfully taken companies to court over it.<\/p>\n