Starbucks has discontinued a blending powder used in its Summer Blended Refreshers from all U.S. stores, the company confirmed last week, following weeks of complaints from baristas about coughing, sore throats and headaches.
The powder was introduced last month as part of a seasonal rollout meant to keep the fruit-based energy refreshers consistently blended, replacing a syrup that sometimes separated on the counter. Buffalo-based barista Jasmine Leli told Fortune that pouring the powder into containers and blenders created a visible cloud of dust. 'It doesn't matter what you do to try and decrease the effects of it going into the air,' she said. 'It's like a cloud.'
A Starbucks spokesperson said the change was part of a 'regular seasonal menu transition' and defended the ingredient itself: the powder contained food-grade silica, which the company called 'a commonly used food ingredient' that is 'safe for use in food and safe for use in our coffeehouses when used according to instructions.'
Starbucks Workers United, which represents roughly 12,000 baristas, surveyed more than 600 workers and reported that 86% said they or a coworker felt ill after using the product, citing headaches, coughing, sore throats and hives. One Reddit post cited by baristas noted the silica was FDA-approved for consumption or handling, not inhalation.
The science is more nuanced than the union's framing suggests. Crystalline silica, found in rock and soil, is linked to silicosis, a serious lung disease. Amorphous silica, the food-grade version used in the powder, is not linked to that condition, though the CDC notes some studies show it can cause lung inflammation at lower severity.
Dr. Peter Orris, an occupational safety expert who reviewed the case at the union's request, wrote that Starbucks should have evaluated the product's health impact before rolling it out — but he found no long-term health risk beyond 'acute irritant symptoms during airborne exposure,' aside from possible flare-ups in workers with existing allergies or asthma.
The episode lands during CEO Brian Niccol's 'Back to Starbucks' turnaround, which has already produced an 8.1% jump in North American comparable sales last quarter. Refreshers rank as the chain's second most popular drink behind espresso, according to the company.
Leli's sharper complaint was about priorities: she said the powder solved a shelf-life problem customers never raised, while wages and staffing hours went unaddressed.
What happened here is a private company responding to a product problem on its own clock. No federal agency ordered Starbucks to pull the powder; a union survey, a barista's account, and an independent report were enough to move a $100-billion-plus retailer within weeks. That is the mechanism free enterprise is supposed to run on — reputational capital and internal review, not a new layer of bureaucracy.
It is also worth noting what the record does not show. The expert Starbucks Workers United itself commissioned found no evidence of lasting harm, only acute irritation. The union's 86% figure describes self-reported discomfort, not a documented health crisis. Starbucks was right to pull a product that irritated its workforce; it does not follow that the episode proves negligence. The company owns that call, and it made it fast — which is more than can be said for most regulatory timelines.
