Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Melapatella (talk | contribs) at 14:34, 9 March 2012 (asked about making corrections). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 August 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Who Owns 5 Hour Energy=

Really

Notability

It seems notable enough to me. It is a nationally (at least) sold energy beverage. I came to Misplaced Pages because I wanted information on the health aspects of the drink. There could certainly be more information about the drink here, but I don't think notability should be an issue. JoshDuffMan (talk) 13:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Agreed, the claims in this commercial are too good to be true. Perhaps listing the individual health risks of the ingredients in the form of "Caffeine is known to cause the following health problems.." for each of the ingredients would be appropriate. However, I do not believe this would meet wikipedia standards unless the health risks were cited off site and not citing other articles on this site. Wolvenmoon (talk) 05:16, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Deleted 2nd external link. Link was not to impartial review; rather to sales page for competing product.

Reads like an advertisement

Does it really have to be noted that the drink is sold in gas stations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.8.208.20 (talk) 13:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Agreed, on top of that, this article needs NPOV, and the "recommended use" section just reads like directions. Sorry I don't know enough about this stuff, but I didn't learn much visiting this page that I couldn't get from the TV commercials. --MMX (talk) 06:08, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Triple agree (is there such a thing?). This is reads like an endorsement or the back of the box. This is definitely more of an advertisement than and sort of useful information. I'm not learning anything that I couldn't by visiting their website which is featured twice on the page. There should be sections about health, side effects, any clinical studies, etc. --Seaneee 07:48, 18 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seaneee (talk • contribs)

Is it safe and effective?

There should be a section on this from independent sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cowicide (talk • contribs) 23:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

The reference (Dahl, Melissa (February 12, 2009). "Zip! 5-hour Energy packs a punch". =msnbc. Retrieved March 29, 2010.) used to support the idea "it remains that the drink is relatively safe in moderation" does NOT seem to do so. It is some kind of placeholder page that consists mostly of comments. It doesn't provide any material upon which that medical opinion can be reliably based. It has no place in this article, unless the article is supposed to be an advertisement. Krioni (talk) 19:41, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

"Too much" vitamin B

It should be worth noting in this article that Vitamin B is water-soluble, so extraneous amounts your body does not use is just flushed out with the urine. Huge, huge amounts will be around long enough to possibly cause health problems, but even the large %'s in this drink will not be a problem.

As for the health effects, the outside articles DO mention different things about different vitamins. For instance, read the Baltimore Sun article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.95.218.254 (talk) 21:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Reception

""Because the product does not contain anything that creates caloric energy, many consumers believe that the insinuated effects advertised by Living Essentials are nothing more than placebo. ""

I don't see how that comment is relevant ^. There is no evidence to support that because these products contain low caloric energy they produce low amounts of energy in the human body. This might mislead readers. Also, consider amphetamines, which have virtually no calories, but are some of the most powerful stimulants available today. Madman91 (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I totally agree, it's not a stretch to realize that caffeine alone (in the drink) give a stimulant effect without caloric intake, not to mention the drink contains two chemical precursors to Dopamine and Norepinephrine. If consumers really do believe this, there needs to be citation. Removed! 98.203.237.248 (talk) 20:06, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Does it work

We need a section on weather or not this definitively works for EVERY HUMAN or does not work AT aLL FOR ANY human — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.173.31.29 (talk) 16:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Do we? ~ Josh "Duff Man" (talk) 01:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes. I do think that we should include something about whether or not it can be expected to work. Lots of Misplaced Pages articles have at least one or two sentences stating whether or not something is backed up by any evidence, scientific or otherwise. Think about it. Why else would anybody even bother reading this page? I don't mean to sound mean, but let's be realistic: nobody genuinely cares about the history of something like this, so I imagine most people reading this page are probably doing so because they want to know if science has either proved or disproved the effects yet, and they figure Misplaced Pages will tell them what the facts are leaning towards. If there is no definitive answer right now, then perhaps we should have a sentence stating so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.31.146.137 (talk) 05:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Discussion

The issue of deletion should be revisited. The quoted research is provided by the vendor, the graphic image shown is trademarked and not a creative commons licensed, the active ingrediant is caffine (according to the bottle) and that is not highlighted, and the whole thing reads as an advertisement. It's obvious this was created by people related to promoting the product and it's here for SEO purposes. The graphic is a big giveaway; remove that since it is a brand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kgbarrett (talk • contribs) 20:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

There are many other pages that display trademarked logos on articles that are about those products, such as Monster Energy and Red Bull.

What part of this page do you think reads like an advertisement? It doesn't read too much like a promotional piece to me, though I'm sure parts of it could be improved.

If you follow the citation for the active ingredients, you can see the information yourself. Do you have another reliable source for the ingredient list? ~ Josh "Duff Man" (talk) 18:47, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

• The only real active ingredient is caffeine, of course.--Milowent • 16:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I added some information that was deleted. I would be interested in added the sections above, such as DOES IT WORK, IS IT SAFE, B VITAMINS, ETC. Can someone advise me on adding information so that we don't have a seesaw of someone not liking and deleting. I want to add credible objective information to this wiki.Melanie Grimes 14:34, 9 March 2012 (UTC)