This study monitored the caffeine content of ready-to-drink coffee and verified the appropriateness of the labeling. The caffeine content was analyzed using HPLC. The average caffeine content of cold brew coffee was 0.31-1.04 mg/mL, with an average of 0.55 mg/mL. The average content of product was 147.27 mg/bottle, and taking into account the recommended daily intake, an adult can consume 2.7 bottles. Americano coffee was 0.15- 0.38 mg/mL, with an average of 0.28 mg/mL. The average content of product was 110.42 mg/bottle, and considering the recommended daily intake, an adult can consume 3.6 bottles. The caffeine content of decaffeinated cold brew coffee was 5.14 mg/bottle and compared to Americano coffee, more than 95% of the caffeine was removed. In addition, we verified the tolerance level of the total caffeine content in ready-to-drink coffee, and none of them exceeded 120%, signifying that all commercial products were effectively managed.

Peer review has been around since journals were first published. Peer review organized by journal editors is, however, relatively recent, having become popular in the mid-1900s. Prior to that time, editors decided what to publish. The change of approach has not been good for science. Mandatory journal peer review is biased against the proper scientific study of important problems. It is also unreliable, slow, expensive, and has led to the mindless publication of many incorrect and useless studies. We suggest that journal peer review should be replaced by assessment of whether a paper follows proper scientific procedures. We describe the development of checklist software to aid in this process. Using the software would reduce the time and cost of reviewing research papers and help to avoid biased reviews. We pretested the software using a convenience sample of published papers and compared preliminary findings with those from software designed to assess the conformity of advertisements with evidence-based persuasion principles. The online journal PLoS employ a criterion they call “soundness,” which is akin to assessing conformance to science, for choosing articles to publish. Since that journal was founded ten years ago, PLoS has become the world’s largest publisher of research articles. We suggest that journal editors, PhD programs, universities, law courts, and research funders including governments adopt the Conformance to Science checklist to efficiently identify research worthy of support and use, and to thereby encourage the growth of scientific knowledge.