GoodSwap Get notified
Starbucks DoubleShot Energy
Photo: Open Food Facts contributors (CC BY-SA)

Energy drinks

Starbucks DoubleShot Energy

15 fl oz

Bad out of 100 Medium confidence
  • Ultra-processed
  • Contains non-nutritive sweeteners
  • Contains added sugars
  • Contains emulsifiers studied for gut effects
  • Contains caffeine
  • Contains artificial flavors
Get GoodSwap

Why it scores 12

Starbucks DoubleShot Energy scores 12 out of 100 (Bad) under GoodSwap’s published rules. What moved the score most:

  1. Sugar: An added sugar. Strong
  2. Dextrose: An added sugar. Strong
  3. Ultra-processed (NOVA 4): Classified NOVA 4: made with industrial ingredients and additives. Strong

Every line of the math is on The Receipt below, with its evidence tier and sources.

Better energy drinks

The same kind of product, at least 10 points higher, sold in the US. Never paid placements.

The Receipt

DoubleShot Energy

START100

Ingredients

  • Sugar
    Strong An added sugar. [1][2][3]
  • Dextrose
    Strong An added sugar. [1][2][3]
  • Cellulose gum (carboxymethylcellulose)
    Strong In a small randomized feeding trial, carboxymethylcellulose modestly increased abdominal discomfort and reduced gut microbiota diversity; in mice it promoted low-grade inflammation. [4][5][6][7]
  • Sucralose
    Strong In a 2022 randomized study, sucralose and saccharin altered the gut microbiome and impaired glucose responses in some people; a 2023 lab study raised questions about its by-product sucralose-6-acetate. [8][9][10][11][2]
subtotal−50

Processing

  • Ultra-processed (NOVA 4)
    Strong Classified NOVA 4: made with industrial ingredients and additives. [12]
  • 4 kinds of ultra-processing markers
    Emerging Industrial additive classes found: flavoring, industrial sugar or starch hydrolysate, non-nutritive sweetener and thickener, stabilizer or gelling agent. [12]
subtotal−22.5

Nutrition per 100 ml

  • Sugars 6.2 g / 100 ml
    Strong Very high in sugar. [1]
  • Energy 47 kcal / 100 ml
    Info Energy-dense for its volume. [2]
subtotal−16
TOTAL 12Bad

100 − 88.5 = 11.5 → 12

Can’t score above 79. Contains sugar, an ingredient of high concern. [1][2][3]

GTIN 00012000038488 · 2026-08-17

score v1.3.0 · kb 2026.10.11

Medium confidence

Same product, same score. Every time.

Nutrition per 100 ml

Energy47 kcal
Fat0.7 g
Saturated fat0.3 g
Trans fat0 g
Carbohydrates6.9 g
Sugars6.2 g
Fiber0.2 g
Protein2 g
Salt0.1 g

Serving: 1 serving (450 g)

Ingredients

High Moderate Not recognized Tap an ingredient for its evidence and rules.
Label text, as published

Starbucks Coffee (Water, Coffee), Reduced-Fat Milk, Skim Milk, Sugar, Maltodextrin, Dextrose, Taurine, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Cellulose Gel, Panax Ginseng Root Extract, Inositol, Sodium Ascorbate, Guarana (Paullinia Cupana) Seed Extract, Cellulose Gum, Niacinamide, Sucralose, Ascorbic Acid (Vitamin C), Tricalcium Phosphate, Carrageenan, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin, Vitamin A Palmitate, Vitamin D3.

Allergens and diets

Contains: Milk

  • Not vegan
  • Palm-oil-free

Always check the package: recipes change.

Healthiest energy drinks in the US

More from Starbucks

Sources

  1. Guideline: sugars intake for adults and children

    World Health Organization · Mar 4, 2015 · Agency assessment

    “In both adults and children, WHO recommends reducing the intake of free sugars to less than 10% of total energy intake”

    who.int

  2. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture · January 2026 · Regulator

    “Limit foods and beverages that include artificial flavors, petroleum-based dyes, artificial preservatives, and low-calorie non-nutritive sweeteners.”

    cdn.realfood.gov

  3. Added and free sugars should be as low as possible

    European Food Safety Authority · Feb 28, 2022 · Agency assessment

    “Sugar consumption is a known cause of dental caries.”

    efsa.europa.eu

  4. Randomized Controlled-Feeding Study of Dietary Emulsifier Carboxymethylcellulose Reveals Detrimental Impacts on the Gut Microbiota and Metabolome

    Gastroenterology · March 2022 · Peer-reviewed

    “Relative to control subjects, CMC consumption modestly increased postprandial abdominal discomfort and perturbed gut microbiota composition in a way that reduced its diversity.”

    doi.org

  5. Dietary emulsifiers impact the mouse gut microbiota promoting colitis and metabolic syndrome

    Nature · Mar 5, 2015 · Peer-reviewed

    “carboxymethylcellulose and polysorbate-80, induced low-grade inflammation and obesity/metabolic syndrome in wild-type hosts and promoted robust colitis in mice predisposed to this disorder.”

    doi.org

  6. Food additive emulsifiers and risk of cardiovascular disease in the NutriNet-Santé cohort: prospective cohort study

    BMJ · Sep 6, 2023 · Peer-reviewed

    “This study found positive associations between risk of CVD and intake of five individual and two groups of food additive emulsifiers widely used in industrial foods.”

    doi.org

  7. Re-evaluation of celluloses E 460(i), E 460(ii), E 461, E 462, E 463, E 464, E 465, E 466, E 468 and E 469 as food additives

    European Food Safety Authority · Jan 16, 2018 · Agency assessment

    “The Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical ADI and that there would be no safety concern at the reported uses and use levels for the unmodified and modified celluloses”

    doi.org

  8. Personalized microbiome-driven effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on human glucose tolerance

    Cell · September 2022 · Peer-reviewed

    “As groups, each administered NNS distinctly altered stool and oral microbiome and plasma metabolome, whereas saccharin and sucralose significantly impaired glycemic responses.”

    doi.org

  9. Toxicological and pharmacokinetic properties of sucralose-6-acetate and its parent sucralose: in vitro screening assays

    Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B · Aug 18, 2023 · Peer-reviewed

    “Sucralose-6-acetate significantly increased the expression of genes associated with inflammation, oxidative stress, and cancer”

    doi.org

  10. EFSA finds sucralose safe when used as currently authorised; cannot confirm safety of extending its use

    European Food Safety Authority · Feb 17, 2026 · Agency assessment

    “EFSA’s experts concluded that the sweetener sucralose (E 955) continues to be safe for consumers for its currently authorised uses as a food additive.”

    efsa.europa.eu

  11. WHO advises not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control in newly released guideline

    World Health Organization · May 15, 2023 · Agency assessment

    “The recommendation is based on the findings of a systematic review of the available evidence which suggests that use of NSS does not confer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children.”

    who.int

  12. Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them

    Public Health Nutrition · April 2019 · Peer-reviewed

    doi.org

  13. Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses

    BMJ · Feb 28, 2024 · Peer-reviewed

    “Greater exposure to ultra-processed food was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, especially cardiometabolic, common mental disorder, and mortality outcomes.”

    doi.org

  14. Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake

    Cell Metabolism · July 2019 · Peer-reviewed

    doi.org

  15. Spilling the Beans: How Much Caffeine is Too Much?

    U.S. Food and Drug Administration · Regulator

    “For most adults, the FDA has cited 400 milligrams* a day — that's about two to three 12-fluid-ounce cups of coffee — as an amount not generally associated with negative effects.”

    fda.gov

  16. Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, Annex III point 4.1 (beverages with high caffeine content)

    European Union (Official Journal) · Oct 25, 2011 · Law

    “‘High caffeine content. Not recommended for children or pregnant or breast-feeding women’”

    eur-lex.europa.eu