Given the task definition and input, reply with output. In this task, you are given a text of many news articles seperated by special token "|||||". Your task is to summarize them.

Coffee doesn’t need cancer warning, California health agency says 
  
 Photo: Richard Vogel / Associated Press 2017 Image 1 of / 1 Caption Close Image 1 of 1 A state official said authoritative research has concluded that coffee does not pose a risk of cancer, despite the presence of carcinogenic chemicals during the roasting and brewing process. A state official said authoritative research has concluded that coffee does not pose a risk of cancer, despite the presence of carcinogenic chemicals during the roasting and brewing process. Photo: Richard Vogel / Associated Press 2017 Coffee doesn’t need cancer warning, California health agency says 1 / 1 Back to Gallery 
  
 Three months after a judge ordered coffee sellers in California to warn customers that the drink might cause cancer, a state health agency drafted regulations Friday that would eliminate the need for any such labels on the grounds that there’s no scientific evidence to support them. 
  
 “Extensive scientific evidence” shows that “drinking coffee has not been shown to increase the risk of cancer and may reduce the risk of some types of cancer,” said the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. 
  
 That office, part of Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration, compiles the list of substances covered by Proposition 65, passed by the voters in 1986. It requires businesses to notify the public when their products, or any substances they release into the environment, contain ingredients that have been shown to cause cancer or birth defects. 
  
 The proposed regulation will be circulated for public comment, submitted to a state administrative office, and — if approved — almost certainly challenged in court. Attorney Raphael Metzger, who won the earlier ruling requiring cancer warnings, said by email Friday that the proposal contradicts the state agency’s “own scientific determination that coffee drinkers are exposed to acrylamide” at levels that pose a potential risk of cancer. 
  
 LATEST SFGATE VIDEOS Now Playing: Now Playing Fire Containment Explained San Francisco Chronicle 
  
 Golden Gate Clubhouse burns down in fire The Chronicle 
  
 NASA: Mars to come closest to Earth since 2003 San Francisco Chronicle 
  
 Weather conditions that lead to high fire danger in California Katie Wood / SFGATE 
  
 Birds fly through the Bay Area's smoky orange sky Jiz Lee 
  
 Smoke visible in Napa County from fire in Yolo Courtesy of Craig Philpott 
  
 Thousands march for immigrant rights in San Francisco Paul Chinn/San Francisco Chronicle 
  
 Concord vegetation fire - from road San Francisco Chronicle 
  
 Concord vegetation fire - close up Courtesy of Allie Rocha 
  
 Pelicans released Roger Wyan, International Bird Rescue 
  
 Acrylamide is produced when some foods are roasted or fried. It is found in potato chips and french fries, which already carry Prop. 65 warning labels. 
  
 Acrylamide is listed as a potential workplace carcinogen by U.S. governmental agencies, which have set limits on its emission. The American Cancer Society said in 2016 that it was still uncertain whether the chemical actually increases the risk of cancer. 
  
 The National Coffee Association, the trade group for the industry that generates more than $40 billion a year in revenue nationwide, denies that coffee contains any ingredient at carcinogenic levels, including acrylamide. 
  
 In March, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle ordered major coffee outlets, including Starbucks, to post cancer warnings. He ruled in a suit by Metzger’s organization, the Council for Education and Research on Toxics. 
  
 On Friday, however, Sam Delson, deputy director and spokesman for the state environmental health hazards office, said authoritative research has concluded that coffee does not pose a risk of cancer, despite the presence of carcinogenic chemicals during the roasting and brewing process. 
  
 He said the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer released its review this week of more than 1,000 studies, and found that “coffee consumption does not pose a significant risk of cancer.” 
  
 Besides acrylamide, Delson said, coffee contains antioxidants that reduce the risk of cancer. He said the international agency found that coffee lowers the risk of liver cancer and of a precursor of uterine cancer, may reduce the risk of colorectal cancer and does not cause breast cancer. 
  
 In response to a question, Delson said the proposed regulation was based entirely on the scientific evidence and that the agency had not been in contact with coffee companies. 
  
 The agency has scheduled a hearing on its proposed regulation for Aug. 16 in Sacramento and will accept public comment through Aug. 30. It will then be reviewed by the state Office of Administrative Law for compliance with Prop. 65 and other laws. Delson said the rule could take effect Jan. 1. 
  
 Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: begelko@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @BobEgelko ||||| FILE - In this Sept. 22, 2017, file photo, a barista pours steamed milk into a cup of coffee at a cafe in Los Angeles. State health officials proposed a regulation change Friday, June 15, 2018, that would... (Associated Press) 
  
 FILE - In this Sept. 22, 2017, file photo, a barista pours steamed milk into a cup of coffee at a cafe in Los Angeles. State health officials proposed a regulation change Friday, June 15, 2018, that would declare coffee doesn't present a significant cancer risk, countering a recent California state... (Associated Press) 
  
 LOS ANGELES (AP) — California officials, having concluded coffee drinking is not a risky pastime, are proposing a regulation that will essentially tell consumers of America's favorite beverage they can drink up without fear. 
  
 The unprecedented action Friday by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to propose a regulation to clear coffee of the stigma that it could pose a toxic risk followed a review of more than 1,000 studies published this week by the World Health Organization that found inadequate evidence that coffee causes cancer. 
  
 The state agency implements a law passed by voters in 1986 that requires warnings of chemicals known to cause cancer and birth defects. One of those chemicals is acrylamide, which is found in many things and is a byproduct of coffee roasting and brewing present in every cup of joe. 
  
 If the regulation is adopted, it would be a huge win for the coffee industry which faces potentially massive civil penalties after recently losing an 8-year-old lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court that could require scary warnings on all coffee packaging sold in California. 
  
 Judge Elihu Berle found that Starbucks and other coffee roasters and retailers had failed to show that benefits from drinking coffee outweighed any cancer risks. He had previously ruled the companies hadn't shown the threat from the chemical was insignificant. 
  
 The state's action rejects that ruling. 
  
 "The proposed regulation would state that drinking coffee does not pose a significant cancer risk, despite the presence of chemicals created during the roasting and brewing process that are listed under Proposition 65 as known carcinogens," the agency said in a statement. "The proposed regulation is based on extensive scientific evidence that drinking coffee has not been shown to increase the risk of cancer and may reduce the risk of some types of cancer." 
  
 Attorney Raphael Metzger, who won the court case on behalf of The Council for Education and Research on Toxics, said he was shocked the agency would move to nullify the court decision and undermine its own report more than a decade ago that drinking even small amounts of coffee resulted in a significant cancer risk. 
  
 "The takeaway is that the state is proposing a rule contrary to its own scientific conclusion. That's unprecedented and bad," Metzger said. "The whole thing stinks to high hell." 
  
 The National Coffee Association had no comment on the proposed change. In the past, the organization has said coffee has health benefits and that the lawsuit made a mockery of the state law intended to protect people from toxics. 
  
 Scientific evidence on coffee has gone back and forth over many years, but concerns have eased recently about possible dangers, with some studies finding health benefits. 
  
 Big Coffee didn't deny that acrylamide was found in the coffee, but argued it was only found at low levels and was outweighed by other benefits such as antioxidants that reduce cancer risk. 
  
 The state agency's action comes about a week after bipartisan bills were introduced in both houses of Congress to require science-based criteria for labels on food and other products. One of the sponsors, Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Oregon, alluded to the California coffee lawsuit as an example of misleading warnings. 
  
 "When we have mandatory cancer warnings on a cup of coffee, something has gone seriously wrong with the process," Schrader said in a news release. "We now have so many warnings unrelated to the actual health risk posed to consumers, that most people just ignore them." 
  
 The lawsuit against Starbucks and 90 companies was brought by the tiny nonprofit under a law that allows private citizens, advocacy groups and attorneys to sue on behalf of the state and collect a portion of civil penalties for failure to provide warnings. 
  
 The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, better known as Proposition 65, requires warning labels for about 900 chemicals known to cause cancer or birth defects. 
  
 The law has been credited with reducing cancer-causing chemicals, but it has been criticized for leading to quick settlement shakedowns and vague warnings that are often ignored. |||||

California officials, having concluded coffee drinking is not a risky pastime, are proposing a regulation that will essentially tell consumers of America's favorite beverage they can drink up without fear, per the AP. The unprecedented action Friday by the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment to propose a regulation to clear coffee of the stigma comes three months after a judge ordered coffee sellers in the state to warn customers that coffee poses a cancer risk. But “extensive scientific evidence” shows that “drinking coffee has not been shown to increase the risk of cancer and may reduce the risk of some types of cancer,” declared the state office, reports the San Francisco Chronicle. If the regulation is adopted—the first step is a period of public comment—it would be a huge win for the coffee industry. That's because the industry faces potentially massive civil penalties after losing an 8-year-old lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court that could require scary warnings on all coffee packaging sold in California. The state agency implements a 1986 law that requires warnings of chemicals known to cause cancer and birth defects. One of those chemicals is acrylamide, a byproduct of coffee roasting and brewing present in every cup of joe. In March, Judge Elihu Berle found that Starbucks and other coffee roasters had failed to show that benefits from drinking coffee outweighed any risks. Big Coffee didn't deny that acrylamide was found in the coffee, but argued it was only found at low levels and was outweighed by other benefits such as antioxidants that reduce cancer risk. The state office agrees.