Starbucks is the most popular drink in the world and yet it’s also been blamed for health problems including diabetes and heart disease.
Now, new research suggests that the chain may have made a huge mistake by adding too much caffeine.
The findings from a study published in the American Journal of Epidemiology show that milk tea has more caffeine than the average drink.
And it’s not just the caffeine that’s bad.
The study showed that milk drinkers who drink milk tea are actually consuming more sugar than those who do not.
The average daily sugar intake for Americans in 2010 was 1,300 milligrams.
The equivalent amount in Starbucks is 1,250 milligram.
The caffeine in the drink is not a problem, but it’s a serious one.
According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, the average person in the US consumes about 1,500 milligromol of caffeine daily, or roughly two to three cups of coffee.
That’s the equivalent of about one-third of a shot of espresso.
It’s also much more than most people get in a day.
If you’re in the habit of drinking lots of coffee, you could be consuming around two-thirds of that amount.
The amount of caffeine in Starbucks coffee is almost four times that amount in a shot.
And that means that when people drink their milk tea in the evening they are consuming around eight times more caffeine and sugar than they would if they were drinking it in the morning.
The most common cause of coffee-related health problems is caffeine intoxication, which is when the body becomes dehydrated.
People with severe cases of caffeine intoxication are more likely to have heart problems, stroke and death.
A similar study from the University of California found that people who drink the most coffee are more than twice as likely to die of a heart attack than those with less coffee consumption.
But it seems that the caffeine content of Starbucks milk teas may have been too high.
“The amount of coffee that people consumed in a given cup was the single largest determinant of the caffeine intake,” said Dr Daniel Gans, a professor of epidemiology at the University at Albany.
“People who drank more caffeine tended to have higher levels of caffeine than those people who drank less.”
Starbucks’ milk tea drinks have a high caffeine content.
They contain about 25% caffeine, which Gans said was a big deal.
“There’s a reason that Starbucks says it’s the highest-calorie milk tea beverage they have in the whole world,” he said.
The high caffeine may have also led to a higher intake of sugar, which has been linked to obesity, heart disease and diabetes.
It also means that coffee drinkers have to consume more sugar, too, which can increase their risk of type 2 diabetes.
So what do you do if you’re a coffee drinker?
Starbucks offers a range of drinks that are made from a blend of different beans.
They include lattes, iced coffee and cappuccinos.
But the best drink is the latte.
It contains 100% caffeine and is the perfect drink for people who like a little extra caffeine.
Dr Gans also found that the most common caffeine intake among coffee drinkers was 10-25 milligres per kilogram of body weight, which was well below the recommended daily intake of 400 milligrotes.
But this may not be as bad as you might think.
“One of the biggest reasons people drink coffee is because they are desperate for it,” said Gans.
But a drink of coffee containing 20-25 mg of caffeine may be a little too much.” “
It’s probably not the case that you have to drink 50-100 milligrettes of caffeine per kilo of coffee to be healthy.
But a drink of coffee containing 20-25 mg of caffeine may be a little too much.”
Dr GANS and his team are now working on a new study to better understand the caffeine effect of Starbucks’ products.
He said that the next step is to find out whether caffeine is actually a factor in the deaths of people with diabetes and cardiovascular diseases.
The next step would be to test whether the caffeine levels of Starbucks coffee drinkers are the same as those of the general population.
But Gans warned that this will be difficult.
“We are not a good lab for this sort of thing,” he told ABC News.
“That is why we need to do some more research.”