FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jim Turner, 202.462.8800
Philadelphia, May 2007 - When the jury asked for a calculator to begin adding up the damages against Splenda, the chlorine-based sweetener’s lawyers rushed to the judge and said they would settle. Thus came an end to the Philadelphia courtroom battle launched by NutraSweet against Splenda for harming its profits by untruthfully saying Splenda is “Made from sugar so it tastes like sugar.”
For the past month these two giants of the artificial sweetener market, NutraSweet, made by Merisant and led by former employees of Monsanto, and Splenda, made by Johnson and Johnson (subsidiary McNeil Nutritionals), have been duking it out in Philadelphia over money for misleading the public. Judged by the final outcome, neither company cares much about consumers.
McNeil’s own consultants admitted that its slogan confused consumers. Many consumers have been led to believe that Splenda is sugar without the calories. McNeil refused to add the phrase "does not contain sugar" to the front panel of Splenda’s yellow box, missing a chance to clear up some confusion. In order to be totally truthful, they would also have to state that Splenda does in fact contain calories.
Chicago-based Merisant sought over $200 million from McNeil - $183 million for unfair profits and $25 million for lost sales. When the jury set out to award Merisant a lot of money, the Johnson and Johnson lawyers cried uncle and rushed to the judge’s chambers seeking a settlement before the jury could act.
Next the worst thing that could happen to consumers happened: Splenda (Johnson and Johnson/McNeil) bought the silence of NutraSweet (Merisant). How much they got paid is secret.
What terms were agreed to?…secret.
What will happen next in the market?…secret.
Neither company has the best interest of consumers on their mind. Merisant wanted a piece of Splenda’s pie. Forget public awareness of Splenda’s misleading advertising. There will be no corrective advertising from this lawsuit, and there is still a pending request for an investigation by the FTC.
In fact, a corrective ad ordered by the FTC could identify Splenda as the chlorinated hydrocarbon that it is; it could tell the public that Splenda contains calories; it could inform the public that studies of diabetics raised the concerns of scientists, including some at the FDA. These are facts Splenda wants to hide.
And now, NutraSweet has helped them.
How You Can Make a Difference
Join Citizens for Health in its efforts to protect consumers from the dangers of Nutrasweet and Splenda. Click on the "Donate" link at the top of the page to become a contributing member and provide critical resources for our non-profit consumer advocacy work - help us get 1 person closer to our goal of 1 million members!
We are also still gathering data to support our petition to the FDA to review their approval for Splenda, or sucralose, and to ensure it is labeled accurately.
Click here to send your comments in support of our petition. Click on the "comment or viewpoint" link in the second paragraph, and scroll down for the comment form. A suggested letter is provided as an attachment at the end of this story; feel free to edit it as you see fit.
If you have experienced negative health effects you believe are a result of consuming Splenda, first click here to file an adverse event report with the FDA. Then call our Splenda Side Effects Hotline at 1.888.774.CALL (2255). Leave a detailed message with your phone number, your location, and a summary of the side effects you are experiencing. We may not be able to follow up on each comment individually, but we are collecting data on negative health effects to submit to the FDA since so far they don't seem to think it is important enough.
Stay tuned for more on Citizens for Health's campaign to stop misleading, unsafe sweeteners, including additional opportunities to take action.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| splendapetitionactionletter11.5.07.doc | 27 KB |
