Sugar vs. Splenda: A Not-So-Sweet Court Battle
Splenda has made a lot of consumers very happy because they can eat the foods that they love without packing all the calories of sugar cane. Despite how some consumers feel about Splenda, the makers of the artificial sweetener were notified in 2007 that they were going to court. The reason? The Sugar Association – the artificial sweetener’s biggest rival – claims the company has deliberately confused consumers and even food manufacturers by claiming that they are different than other artificial sweeteners on the market.
The Jury Has a Tough Job
What the jury will need to determine in this case is if McNeil Nutritionals, which is a division of Johnson & Johnson, has intentionally misled consumers. The Sugar Association believes that the company has misled consumers because it states in its marketing for the product and even on the packaging that the product contains sugar. This is troublesome for the Sugar Association because it believes that the company is trying to dupe consumers and food manufacturers into believing that this is an all natural ingredient that is exactly like sugar with just fewer calories when this is not true.
Merisant, which is the manufacturer of Equal and NutraSweet, has a problem with the makers of Splenda because Splenda does not contain sugar, despite the fact that it has been marketed that way. Merisant says that Splenda is sweetened with a synthetic compound that involves a very complex chemical process. Of course, McNeil replies that Merisant is just trying to win a battle since they have lost the battle in the grocery stores where consumers are buying more Splenda than NutraSweet and Equal.
The lawsuit is based upon the fact that McNeil has led consumers to believe their advertising and even their packaging that Splenda is safer and healthier than other artificial sweeteners on the market, though many studies show that it is no more safe or healthy than the aspartame based products that are out there. Merisant lawyer Gregory LoCascio stated, “McNeil documents show that they knew consumers were confused and they didn’t do anything to stop it.” Being that the judge has decided that this case should go before a jury, the jury will certainly have a tough job as it wades through all the evidence in an attempt to determine what is fact, fiction, and what is simply competition.
Troublesome Taglines
Many believe that the tagline that McNeil has used with Splenda is what has made them a target for all of this legal action. When the product first hit the markets their tagline was “Made from sugar so it tastes like sugar. But it’s not sugar.” When sales were not as impressive as the company had hoped they dropped the last sentence and suddenly sales skyrocketed. The company used this slogan as they didn’t want it to be labeled an “artificial sweetener” as they thought this would be the death of the product before it even got its start yet it is an artificial sweetener.
The tagline not only attracted consumers but it also attracted companies like Pepsico that wanted to use the product as they thought it was healthier and they knew their customers thought so, as well. Merisant believes that McNeil has made $183 million in unfair profits since 2003, all based on what many believe is a misleading tagline.
Despite legal action and research that suggests that Splenda may not be any better for you than Equal and NutraSweet, Splenda is outselling Equal four to one. Most Americans state that the reason they buy products with Splenda is that the products taste more like sugar than those with Equal. No one knows how this legal battle will ultimately turn out, one thing is for sure, both companies are in it to win.
Comments
One Response to “Sugar vs. Splenda: A Not-So-Sweet Court Battle”
Leave a Reply
wow!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!