Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
J
jenscats5
Guest
From yesterday's News Journal.....
PHILADELPHIA -- The makers of the hot-selling sugar substitute Splenda filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Delaware on Tuesday alleging that the Sugar Association and other groups are waging a "malicious smear campaign" against their product in an attempt to boost sugar sales.
McNeil Nutritionals, the unit of Johnson & Johnson that markets Splenda, is seeking corrective advertising and unspecified damages. The lawsuit says the defendants are trying to convince consumers that Splenda is "unhealthy or unsafe" and that they "would be better off consuming refined sugar, which has been linked to an increase in the prevalence of obesity and its related health risks."
"They're trying to create a fear factor around Splenda, which is just totally inappropriate," said Colin Watts, president of Fort Washington-based McNeil Nutritionals,
The lawsuit points to a Web site associated with the Sugar Association and titled "The Truth About Splenda." The Web site disputes claims that Splenda has been thoroughly tested, that it is "safe to eat, even for children," and that consumers "have every reason to believe what they see and hear in Splenda's advertisements."
The active ingredient in Splenda - marketed with the slogan "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar" - is sucralose.
Sucralose begins life as pure cane sugar before it is chemically altered during the manufacturing process to create a compound that doesn't contain any calories, according to company officials.
Tuesday's suit is in response to a false advertising lawsuit the Sugar Association filed against McNeil in California in December, Watts said. That lawsuit seeks to prevent the makers of Splenda from continuing what it called a "misleading" advertising campaign.
Jim Murphy, a Sugar Association lawyer, said there are similar consumer class-action complaints in New York, New Jersey, Ohio, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Florida and California. He added that his group also believes there are unanswered questions about whether Splenda is healthy.
"I think one of the concerns is that there really have been no long-term studies that resolve whether or not consumption of Splenda is healthy," he said.
Sucralose was approved for sale in the United States in 1998 after years of testing on rats, other mammals and humans, according to George Pauli, of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Office of Food Additive Safety.
"We concluded that the use is safe," Pauli said. "That means there is a reasonable certainty in the mind of competent scientists that no harm will result from its intended use." FDA officials declined to comment specifically on the lawsuit.
PHILADELPHIA -- The makers of the hot-selling sugar substitute Splenda filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Delaware on Tuesday alleging that the Sugar Association and other groups are waging a "malicious smear campaign" against their product in an attempt to boost sugar sales.
McNeil Nutritionals, the unit of Johnson & Johnson that markets Splenda, is seeking corrective advertising and unspecified damages. The lawsuit says the defendants are trying to convince consumers that Splenda is "unhealthy or unsafe" and that they "would be better off consuming refined sugar, which has been linked to an increase in the prevalence of obesity and its related health risks."
"They're trying to create a fear factor around Splenda, which is just totally inappropriate," said Colin Watts, president of Fort Washington-based McNeil Nutritionals,
The lawsuit points to a Web site associated with the Sugar Association and titled "The Truth About Splenda." The Web site disputes claims that Splenda has been thoroughly tested, that it is "safe to eat, even for children," and that consumers "have every reason to believe what they see and hear in Splenda's advertisements."
The active ingredient in Splenda - marketed with the slogan "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar" - is sucralose.
Sucralose begins life as pure cane sugar before it is chemically altered during the manufacturing process to create a compound that doesn't contain any calories, according to company officials.
Tuesday's suit is in response to a false advertising lawsuit the Sugar Association filed against McNeil in California in December, Watts said. That lawsuit seeks to prevent the makers of Splenda from continuing what it called a "misleading" advertising campaign.
Jim Murphy, a Sugar Association lawyer, said there are similar consumer class-action complaints in New York, New Jersey, Ohio, West Virginia, Massachusetts, Florida and California. He added that his group also believes there are unanswered questions about whether Splenda is healthy.
"I think one of the concerns is that there really have been no long-term studies that resolve whether or not consumption of Splenda is healthy," he said.
Sucralose was approved for sale in the United States in 1998 after years of testing on rats, other mammals and humans, according to George Pauli, of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Office of Food Additive Safety.
"We concluded that the use is safe," Pauli said. "That means there is a reasonable certainty in the mind of competent scientists that no harm will result from its intended use." FDA officials declined to comment specifically on the lawsuit.
