Meant to answer the Dr. Pepper discussion earlier.
http://en.fairmormon.org/Word_of_Wisdom/Cola_drinks_and_caffeine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Word_of_Wisdom#Application_by_Joseph_Smith
The long and the short is that while some leaders have advocated against caffeine and others not, the fact of the matter is that coffee and tea remain the only caffeinated beverages disallowed by my church. Check the link for some interesting context, including the actual quotes by Joseph Smith’s brother Hyrum Smith that specify that the term “hot drinks” applies to coffee and tea.
But how do I as an individual understand the rules, including the seeming inconsistency between the no coffee/tea rule and the cola exceptions? Well bearing in mind that the revelation prohibiting coffee and tea was given in 1833, there were no cola beverages. However, it was clear that coffee and tea had some mildly addicting and stimulant properties. The revelation prohibited hot drinks, which were later clarified to mean exactly coffee and tea. The revelation was initially just a recommendation, but over time became more and more forceful, and about 100 years later became a commandment.
Now bear in mind that illegal drugs are not mentioned at all in the revelation, and yet we treat those as against our commandments and that revelation as well. You see, the spirit of the law states that one should avoid addicting and damaging substances or inappropriate substance usage. Later church leaders have added such drug usage to the list of prohibitions. Therefore we have a clear letter of the law ennumerated in the revelation itself and expanded upon by church leaders, and we have a spirit of the law, inferred by the intent. The letter of the law does not prohibit cola drinks, even though many do contain more caffeine than something like green tea. If the revelation were given today, I doubt tea would be disallowed, or else that cola drinks would be added to the list. But since neither is the case, and church leaders have avoided ruling out cola drinks, and therefore we are left to use our own judgment within the spirit of the law.
My solution based on this situation: I do drink caffeinated drinks, but not frequently, and usually when I am struggling to remain awake, such as when I’m stuck working night shift (every now and then I still have to). However, I do limit my intake, and I particularly avoid energy drinks and other highly caffeinated beverages. I tend to get caffeine hangovers too, and usually the easiest way to avoid them is by drinking more caffeine, so I usually go a few days between if I can. But I can see how it can become an addictive habit, and thus, even if not against the letter of the law, is at least breaking the spirit of the law with regular usage. So I tend to err on the side of caution. And that’s my philosophy. It took me a couple of hours to get it all down and my browser is displaying things weird, so hopefully this is coherent.