http://courttv.com/people/2005/0217/splenda_ctv.html



Sugar Association sued for launching anti-Splenda ad campaign Sugar substitute Splenda is advertised as being "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar," a claim the Sugar Association disputes. By Samantha Murphy
Court TV

The Sugar Association received a not-so-sweet surprise this week when it was notified it was being sued for claiming that the popular sugar substitute Splenda is unhealthy and unsafe.

McNeil Nutritionals, a Fort Washington, Pa., company that markets the Johnson & Johnson sugar substitute, charged the Sugar Association with false advertising and deceptive trade practices. "We are trying to stop this group, their members, and their false and misleading claims that are designed to ruin the reputation of [Splenda]," said McNeil's spokeswoman Monica Neufang. However, the Sugar Association, which advocates the health benefits of sugar, claims it launched an ad campaign against Splenda because it falsely bills itself as a natural product.

"Splenda claims that because it is made from sugar, it tastes like sugar," said Adam Fox, an attorney with the Sugar Association. "Their publicity confuses consumers under a false impression that it's natural. It's not grown in a sugar cane field. They say it's sugar without the guilt, which is not true."

McNeil Nutritionals has faced an array of lawsuits over its Splenda advertising, including nine consumer class-action suits in several states and three federal commission complaints. The Sugar Association launched its campaign against the sweetener earlier this year.

McNeil Nutritionals, however, alleges the anti-Splenda ads include false information about the country's best-selling no-calorie sweetener.

The Sugar Association argues that many of Splenda's claims are false, including: Splenda is safe to eat, even for children; Splenda has been thoroughly tested; and consumers have every reason to believe what they see and hear in Splenda's advertisements.

In response, the McNeil lawsuit claims "the sugar industry's baseless and bad-faith smear campaign is calculated to destroy the reputation and goodwill of the Splenda brand."

Fox contends the Sugar Association only wants to educate consumers about the sweetener.

"Most Splenda products, like the packets used to put in coffee, are actually made in a chemical plant in Alabama and contain sucrose," he said. "They are misleading their consumers."

Neufang, however, said Splenda is actually made from sugar.

"It tastes like sugar and even performs like sugar," she said. "There are sugar trucks outside the plant in Alabama that makes sucralose from refined table sugar or sucrose."

Whether it is accurately advertised or not, Splenda is indeed safe to consume, according to George Pauli of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Office of Food Additive Safety.

"We have concluded with reasonable certainty that the product is safe for its intended use," Pauli said. "It was tested in 1998, was safe then, and is safe now."

McNeil Nutritionals said the Sugar Association's legal team has not yet responded to the lawsuit.

__________________
196/135-135

Perhaps the Sugar Association should also sue the U. S. Gov't for implying (or even stating) that corn syrup is the number one contributor to the epidemic of obesity in the USA today.

I don't believe in lawsuits to solve issues of personal choice. If you smoke and get cancer...??? If you drink four regular soft drinks every day and get fat....???

I guess this lawsuit is all about who's telling the truth. But we're so accustomed to the "spin" applied to all kinds of information that it's really hard to get at the facts anymore.

As for personal choice. Give me my Splenda!!

__________________
Barb L.
Atkins since Jan 2003
Maintenance as of 4/05


My Fitday Journal

Believe me.....it's all about "market share" and the almighty dollar. Splenda is kicking sugar's hiney all the way to the bank. That's the bottom line.

__________________

yep.

Did any of you think that splenda was "natural"??
That's like saying, "I didn't know smoking was bad for you." Very very stupid.

They really must take us low carb consumers for big fools, mustn't they?

And if they're going to say there's a problem with Splenda being safe for human consumption, what shall we say about sugar? <evil grin>

Of course, excess consumption of either is not good, and it would be better NOT to use any artificial sweetener at all, if one could avoid it. Jonny Bowden says he uses very small amounts of xylitol - a natural sweetener which has about half the carbs and calories of sugar, but is super sweet so you don't need much.

But as has been said, in the end, it's our choice, and we're not the stupid morons that the sugar lobby is making us out to be. I find their approach offensive, frankly.

I have to agree.
Frankly, I feel like the sugar industry has been hurting for a long time (thanks to LC & low-calorie diets) and this was just an easy target.

I try not to use too much of ANY sugar substitute, but I can attest to the fact that SUGAR -- the pure, real thing has been FAR more detrimental to MY health than any sweetener I've used. And I've got the scale and the glucometer to prove it!

__________________
Summer

I agree that the lawsuit is all about money......money that the sugar companies want. I do not use an over abundance of sweetners so I am not really worried about using Splenda.....for me its much better than using a lot of regular sugar.

__________________
Honey
Starting 203
Current 194
Goal 125

It's only a matter of time before they do to Splenda what they did to saccharine and cyclamates and aspartame. But we'll probably have a new-and-improved sweetener by then with a brand new patent. And it really will taste just like sugar! That's what history suggests.

__________________
**************
"And so, in my State of the—my State of the Union—or state—my speech to the nation, whatever you want to call it, speech to the nation—I asked Americans to give 4,000 years—4,000 hours over the next—the rest of your life—of service to America. That's what I asked—4,000 hours."

My two favorite lines...
"...the Sugar association, which advocates the health benefits of sugar" (1)
and
"...the Sugar association only wants to educate consumers about [Splenda]." (2)

(1) Such as dental decay and consumption of empty calories
(2) And if ya' believe that, I got a nice big bridge just north of here that I'll sell you, cheap.

Aderyn

Sweetener in the Spotlight: Is Splenda Safe?

Lawsuits Put New Focus on Splenda and Other Artificial Sweeteners

By Colette Bouchez
WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Michael Smith, MD
on Wednesday, February 16, 2005


Feb. 16, 2005 -- Courtroom battles between the makers of Splenda and Equal have many questioning the safety of artificial sweeteners.

Since early 2000 McNeil Nutritionals has been advertising that its product -- Splenda -- is "made from sugar so it tastes like sugar." But the National Sugar Association and Merisant Worldwide (maker of Equal brand sweetener) have challenged that claim in a lawsuit.

McNeil Nutritionals shot back with a countersuit implying the case against them was more about corporate sour grapes than truth in consumer advertising.

But court battles and corporate backstabbing aside, the question on consumers' minds is not so much whether advertising slogans are right or wrong, but do they really make a difference -- at home, on the dinner table where it really counts?

Dietitian Nancy Restuccia, MS, RD, says they most definitely do.

"Splenda is not sugar -- and to piggyback it on to the reputation of the centuries' old profile of sugar is more than misleading, it could come back to haunt us, perhaps sooner than we think," says Restuccia, a nutritionist at the Center for Obesity Surgery at New York Presbyterian/Columbia University Medical Center in New York City.

Indeed, while there are currently only a handful of studies that question Splenda's safety and more than 100 which attest to its safe use, Restuccia says it simply hasn't been around long enough to amass any long-term data -- or even short-term data involving heavy consumption.

What Happens When Sweeteners Interact?

"Sugar may have its health drawbacks, but at least we know we're not in for any major surprises -- and we just can't say that about Splenda yet -- so to imply that it's got the same profile as sugar is misleading and that is important today, as well as in the long run," she says.

Samantha Heller, MS, RD, agrees. "Saying Splenda is made from sugar is like taking the round wheels off a car and putting on square wheels. Is it still a car? Yes. But can it still perform like a car? No -- and what's more we don't know what's going to happen when people try to 'drive it' cross country," says Heller.

Indeed, while Splenda starts out as sugar, some serious scientific tinkering goes on before it gets into your coffee. As Heller explains, this involves removing three atoms found in sugar and replacing them with three atoms of the chemical chlorine. Some say that form of chlorine is similar to what's found in pesticides -- though in published reports the manufacturer has denied that claim.

But while all that may not matter much to your taste buds, experts say it takes on a new and more important meaning as plans roll out to include Splenda in a wide variety of treats, including more diet sodas, baked goods, and even processed foods.

"It's not like you're going to be using a teaspoon in your coffee once in a while -- it's going to be everywhere, in everything, which makes it even more important for people to understand what they are and are not getting with this product," says Restuccia.

Also important to note: Experts say we have almost no data on the way in which artificial sweeteners interact with each other -- particularly at high amounts. And that, says Restuccia may come back to haunt us even more.

"As more and more products are being made with artificial sweeteners, there is more likelihood that we will not only be consuming more of them but also mixing different ones, sometimes in a single meal -- and we really have no idea what that means health wise, in the short or the long run," says Restuccia.

What About Other Artificial Sweeteners?

The FDA has approved five artificial sweeteners:


Acesulfame potassium (Sunett)
Aspartame (NutraSweet or Equal)
Sucralose (Splenda)
D-Tagatose (Sugaree)
Saccharin (Sweet 'N Low)

You may be surprised to see saccharin on that list. In the 1970s, the FDA was going to ban saccharin based on the reports of a Canadian study that showed that saccharin was causing bladder cancer in rats. A public outcry kept saccharin on the shelves (there were no other sugar substitutes at that time), but with a warning label that read, "Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals."

That warning label is no longer needed, says Ruth Kava, PhD, RD, director of nutrition for the American Council on Science and Health. Further research has shown that male rats have a particular pH factor that predisposes them to bladder cancer. "A lot of things that cause harm in animals don't always cause harm in humans," she says.

Like saccharin, aspartame is another artificial sweetener that -- though thoroughly tested by the FDA and deemed safe for the general population -- has had its share of critics who blame the artificial sweetener for causing everything from brain tumors to chronic fatigue syndrome.

Not so, says Kava.

The only people for whom aspartame is a medical problem are those with the genetic condition known as phenylkenoturia (PKU), a disorder of amino acid metabolism. Those with PKU need to keep the levels of phenylalanine in the blood low to prevent mental retardation as well as neurological, behavioral, and dermatological problems. Since phenylalanine is one of the two amino acids in aspartame, people who suffer from PKU are advised not to use it.

Some people can be sensitive to artificial sweeteners and experience symptoms such as headaches and upset stomach, but otherwise, there is no credible information that aspartame -- or any other artificial sweetener -- causes brain tumors, or any other illness, says registered dietitian Wendy Vida, with HealthPLACE, the health and wellness division of Highmark Blue Cross Blue Shield in Pittsburgh.

Kava says that since artificial sweeteners are so much sweeter than sugar, a very small amount is needed to achieve the same sweetness one gets from sugar. "If used normally, the amounts you take in are so minuscule as to be of no concern at all."

Another sweetener receiving much publicity of late is stevia, an herbal sweetening ingredient used in food and beverages by South American natives for many centuries and in Japan since the mid-1970s.

According to Ray Sahelian, MD, author of The Stevia Cookbook, stevia has shown no significant side effects after more than 20 years of use in Japan. "There are no indications at this point from any source that stevia has shown toxicity in humans," says Sahelian, though he agrees that further research is warranted.

Because stevia is not FDA-approved, it cannot be sold as an artificial sweetener; however it can be -- and is -- sold as a dietary supplement. Because these supplements are not regulated as well as those that have received FDA approval, and therefore have no guarantee of purity, Kava is leery about the use of stevia. "This is a product that's just asking for good research studies," she says. "We just don't know enough yet."

__________________
196/135-135