How Coca-Cola’s Caffeine Trial Changed U.S. Food Regulation

This happened over a century ago, and it was one of the earliest legal battles that put caffeine in the spotlight, helping shape how America views and eventually regulates this everyday stimulant.

What Was the Case About

In 1909, the U.S. government went after Coca-Cola, accusing the company of false advertising and secretly adding a harmful stimulant to its drink. The case got an unusual name because it was based on a shipment of Coca-Cola syrup that was seized—it was officially called United States vs. Forty Barrels and Twenty Kegs of Coca-Cola.

What Did People Expect

When the trial began in 1911 in Chattanooga, Tennessee, most people assumed it was going to be about cocaine. That’s because, in the late 1800s, Coke’s original formula had included coca leaf extract (which contained cocaine), and the company even advertised it as a peppy, energizing drink.

But by 1903, Coca-Cola had already removed the cocaine. What was still in the drink—and at the center of this case—was caffeine. Back then, not many people understood it well, even though it was widely consumed.

Why the Government Went After Caffeine

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s chief chemist, Dr. Harvey Wiley, believed caffeine was dangerous. He publicly called caffeinated drinks “habit-forming and nerve-racking.”

Wiley and his pharma division head, Lyman Kebler, were especially worried about how easily children could get their hands on these soft drinks. Kebler once saw four-year-olds drinking Coca-Cola and later wrote a scathing report titled: “Habit-Forming Agents: Their Indiscriminate Sale and Use a Menace to the Public Welfare.”

Wiley wanted Coca-Cola to be a test case. But his boss, Agriculture Secretary James Wilson, avoided it until a journalist from The Atlanta Georgian threatened to expose the government’s cozy ties with the soft drink industry. Within two weeks, the syrup was seized.

One legal issue made the case tricky: the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act required proof of harmful adulteration or misbranding. Wiley accused Coca-Cola of both.

The Trial: What Came Up

By the time the trial started, the government had prepared over 20 witnesses, including:

• Toxicologists, who said the drink triggered “reflex irritability”

• Behavioral scientists, who warned that caffeine was addictive

• Consumers, who admitted they were hooked

Wiley’s team ended with Kebler saying, “Caffeine is a drug with having poisonous tendency.”

The trial became a media sensation. The Chattanooga News devoted most of its front page to it every day. Both sides assembled expert witnesses, including scientists from major universities and government labs.

What Coca-Cola Argued

Coca-Cola pushed back. The company’s VP, Charles Howard Candler, said they never marketed the drink as “Dope” or “Coke” (even if people used those names).

When Candler learned the government planned to argue misbranding, he could hardly believe Wiley wanted to punish the company for not containing cocaine.

Their defense strategy was twofold:

• Caffeine wasn’t an added substance—it was part of the original formula.

• Coca-Cola was a widely recognized name protected by trademark law.

Coca-Cola Hired a Psychologist.

The company knew it needed hard science. So they hired Harry Hollingworth, a young psychologist from Columbia. He agreed—on the condition that he could publish the findings no matter what.

With his wife Leta Stetter Hollingworth, he ran a 40-day study on 16 healthy volunteers. They were given capsules with caffeine, Coca-Cola syrup, or a placebo. Neither the participants nor researchers knew who got what, making it one of the first double-blind studies in the U.S.

Unlike earlier research, which focused on simple motor responses, Hollingworth tested 30 cognitive functions, including perception, judgment, and reaction time. He avoided the problems Wiley’s “Poison Squad” had faced.

What the Tests Found

The Hollingworths measured reaction speed, coordination, sharpness, math, and color recognition, collecting over 64,000 data points.

When Hollingworth took the stand, the courtroom fell completely silent. Most people had never heard a scientist explain how carefully human trials must be run. He spoke calmly, faced no cross-examination, and showed that caffeine caused no fatigue or depression at the doses tested. Instead, it gave a short-lived but tolerable mental boost.

What Was the Verdict

Both sides knew the trial was tipping in Coca-Cola’s favor. The government’s evidence wasn’t strong, and Coca-Cola had shown that caffeine was part of its original formula.

Just as the government was about to bring in defense witnesses, Coca-Cola’s lawyers filed for a directed verdict. The government didn’t oppose it. The judge dismissed the case before it reached a jury, which made it easier to appeal.

What Happened After

The government didn’t give up. Though Wiley retired in 1912, they kept appealing.

• In 1914, the Sixth Circuit upheld Coca-Cola’s win.

• In 1916, the Supreme Court ruled caffeine was an additive under the law.

Coca-Cola settled the matter by paying court costs and cutting the caffeine in its drink by half to avoid more trouble.

Why It Still Matters

This case changed how the U.S. looked at caffeine. It was also one of the first times human experiments and scientific data were used in a food safety trial.

And while debates over caffeine continue today, that 1911 case helped turn it into America’s favorite legal stimulant—one that most people now accept as safe, in moderation.

By Dr. Pooja Bansal (PT)

_MSM