FREE Subscription The World’s Most Popular Natural Health Newsletter   
France Bans Splenda Ads

The Commercial Court of Paris has found that advertising claims used by McNeil Nutritionals, the marketers of the artificial sweetener Splenda, violate French consumer protection laws. They ruled that Splenda's advertising slogans, such as "Because it comes from sugar, sucralose tastes like sugar," are misleading to consumers, and have ordered McNeil to stop using them.

The case was brought against French subsidiaries of McNeil Nutritionals by the competing artificial sweetener firm Merisant. The court awarded Merisant 40,000 Euros in damages.

McNeil was given 30 days to amend all packaging of Splenda in France. The Court also prohibited the distribution of any products in the old packaging after a period of four months.

The ruling came just one day before a similar case between Merisant and McNeil in the United States resulted in an undisclosed settlement agreement that concluded a three-year court battle between the two companies. McNeil also faces a similar case in the United States brought by the Sugar Association, due to go to trial in November.

Food Navigator.com Europe May 14, 2007

Bradenton Herald May 14, 2007


Dr. Mercola's Comment:

Just as makers of Splenda settled their U.S. lawsuit with Merisant Co. (which produces Equal), their claim that their product comes from, and tastes like, sugar has been banned in France. Although French authorities have probably fined McNeil considerably less than Merisant received in the U.S. settlement, in France they must stop all their false advertising claims and reconfigure all consumer packaging.

If you're still on the fence regarding the non-safety of Splenda and other artificial sweeteners, do your health a favor by reviewing my book Sweet Deception. It uncovers dozens of major deceptions that the manufacturers of artificial sweeteners, especially Splenda, have been pulling on the public.

About 200 studies have been done on Splenda, although most are not even published. However, 98 percent of the studies done on Splenda were paid for by the manufacturer, with predictable results.

And even if you believe those very likely biased studies, Splenda has never been studied for more than six months in any human trial -- and even those ONLY looked at blood sugar control.

Hundreds of millions of people are serving as human guinea pigs for a product that has NEVER had a long-term human safety trial. But believe me, as alarming as this information is, it is only the tiny tip of the iceberg.

Related Articles:




Did you find this article interesting?
Article's Comment     ( 28 Comments )
 
 
 +16 Points           
 
Author of the Article
BY Russ Bianchi   
  
[ Joined on 09/06 ]
[ Posted on May 14, 2007 ]
Post Reply
I never thought I'd live to say the 'French Are Correct', but here is a case and point, based in sound science, and facts.

I do not think it hurt either that Splenda Brand's (sucralose) parent company is the largest and oldest BRITISH sugar company on the face of the globe either (Tate & Lyle)...or at least this is what one of the possible SPIN talking points will be, from these ingredient DEATH MERCHANT'S PR  FIRM, for headline countering, in the days or months to come.

The bottom lines REMAINS, sucralose is HIGHLY TOXIC, CAUSES CANCER & DEATH in humans, at any level of consumption, is NOT heat stable as claimed, and is NOT a sugar molecule, but a highly synthetic piece of chemistry attaching three chlorine molecules to the based hydrocarbon, that was once refined sugar. 

Sucralose/Splenda does not, and never did exist in nature, until created in a UK laboratory.

Read Dr. Mercola's SWEET DECEPTION, and never use the little yellow packets, unless your serving tea or coffee to diabetic Osama bin Laden. 

Such artificial sweetener "hospitality" will hasten  Osama's departure to his just reward, as barker for a gay, transgender, and tranvestite strip club in Vegas (owned by Christians & Jews) for eternity.

And who says there is not 'divine justice'?

;-)

Uncle Russ



 

 +2 Points           
 
Author of the Article
BY TerryW   
  
[ Joined on 05/07 ]
Author of the Article [ Posted on June 01, 2007 ]
 
I expected one of these comments to at least mention using Stevia as a sweetner.  That's all I've been using for years and it comes in those little packets just like Equal, Splenda, and Sweet-n-Low. 

I think the negative remarks toward France go back to their criticism of the US invading Iraq - you remember - Freedom Fries, etc.  Turns out, France was right about that too. 

Now if France is that concerned about the future health of their citizens,  why have they not checked for illegal drug residues in U.S. horsemeat??    They eat horsemeat imported from the U.S. and in the U.S. there are no "food animal regulations" imposed on the horsemeat industry here - which we have just about shut down but it's only taken a few decades.  U.S. horse owners, of which I am one, use a drug known as Bute as routinely as people use aspirin and in the EU this drug is strictly banned from EVER entering the food supply.  Any horse that's EVER had Bute in its lifetime is banned from EVER being slaughtered for human consumption.  Yet the French, the Italians, the Germans, etc etc, are all consuming U.S. horsemeat Bute steaks.  When will the French wake up on that one??




            
 
Author of the Article
BY jsp   
  
[ Joined on 04/07 ]
Author of the Article [ Posted on June 05, 2007 ]
 
russ, why did you never think you would live to say "the French are correct"? do you not know that the french routinely abide by far more of the principles that you apparently support than do your fellow countrymen? the list is long but let's just cite the enforced labeling of genetically modified products, a refusal to invade iraq, the availability of unpasteurized dairy products, the normality of seasonal, local, organic products at neighborhood farmers' markets, and a far less complicated relationship to food that is entirely predicated on taste and health, not fads. or is it that you are eager to jump on the xenophobic bandwagon? 

 
 +9 Points           
 
Author of the Article
BY SamVed   
  
[ Joined on 05/07 ]
[ Posted on May 15, 2007 ]
Post Reply
France is the first counrtry where they amended their Constitution so as to explicitely include the Precautionary Principle, is it not? I believe it was a couple of years ago.

Here's a good summary of the Precautionary Principle:
http://www.panna.org/resources/panups/panup_20031023-rp342.dv.html


"The principle of precautionary action says, first, that the burden of proof of safety should be borne by the proponent of a new technology, not by the public; and second, that, where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation."

I was told that the French are also making use of this in terms of liability: if a corporation (chemical industry, genetically modified crops, etc) makes a mess of your property, you are far more likely to get reparations. If they pollute water or whatever, the mind set in France is that the polluter is expected to clean-up the mess.

Here in the US of A, judges--not mentioning politicians and the media, still massively side with corporate polluters.
 

 +1 Points           
 
Author of the Article
BY mediapusher   
  
[ Joined on 06/07 ]
Author of the Article [ Posted on June 02, 2007 ]
 
In answer to one of the poster's comments regarding Stevia; Many citizens in the Untied States would love to see the widespread use of Stevia in their own country, however our unfair and biased  government that has always had very selective and unequal concern about its citizen's human rights, is not allowing it.

I would also like to point out that Stevia's flavor is not pleasant to many people , including me.. Why not just use bee vomit (honey) or freshly squeezed apple juice as a sweetener like I do?

 +1 Points           
 
Author of the Article
BY