|
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is supposed to police grocery store shelves for unsafe food additives and misleading labeling. However, the FDA is understaffed, underfunded, often disinterested, and almost never takes action—even when watchdog groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest file formal complaints. The Federal Trade Commission's performance this decade on deceptive advertising has been similarly lackluster. CSPI's litigation department helps fill the void left by the inactive government agencies and uses state and federal courts to help correct corporate misbehavior. CSPI's legal filings have produced binding settlements resulting in more honest labeling of artificial ingredients and halting deceptive marketing. Litigation, or the threat of litigation, has spurred several companies to remove artificial trans fats from their foods and is reducing the marketing of junk foods to kids. CURRENT DOCKETMILLER BREWING CO. Although Anheuser-Busch settled with CSPI and several state Attorneys General, Miller Brewing Co. refused to talk with CSPI after CSPI wrote both Miller and Anheuser-Busch. Miller continues to market Sparks—an alcoholic energy drink that contains caffeine and other stimulant additives that are not officially approved for use in such drinks. Dubbed "alcospeed," Sparks has more alcohol than beer. No studies are available to support the safety of consuming those stimulants and alcohol together—but new research does indicate that the young consumers of these type of drinks are more likely to binge drink, become injured, ride with an intoxicated driver, or be taken advantage of sexually than drinkers of conventional alcoholic drinks. The viral marketing campaigns behind the drinks are clearly designed to appeal to young, and often underage, drinkers, according to CSPI. Miller rejected CSPI’s offer to talk before suit, so CSPI is preparing the lawsuit against Miller.AIRBORNE. CSPI joined a lawsuit in California state court against the makers of Airborne, the best-selling cold "remedy" in the country. There is no evidence that Airborne works, aside from the slight possible benefit from the Vitamin C in the product. Airborne is completely ineffective in preventing colds, as the company has claimed for years. The company agreed to settle the lawsuit by refunding money to defrauded consumers out of a settlement fund of $23.3 million. After all claims of consumers and lawyer fees have been paid, any remaining amounts will go to charity. Separately, the Federal Trade Commission and state Attorneys General investigated the same claims. UPDATE 8/08: The federal court approved the settlement of the lawsuit on August 13, 2008. On August 14, the Federal Trade Commission announced that it had settled its own investigation. http://ftc.gov/opa/2008/08/airborne.shtm There is still time to file a request for refunds, but the deadline is soon — September 15. Consumers seeking refunds for purchases of Airborne can obtain a claim form by writing to the Airborne Class Action Settlement Administrator, PO Box 1897, Faribault, MN 55021-7152, calling 1-888-952-9080, or by visiting www.AirborneHealthSettlement.com. (The state Attorneys General investigation is ongoing.) AURORA DAIRY. On December 18, 2007, CSPI joined a lawsuit in California against Aurora Dairy, the second-largest organic milk company. Aurora produced non-organic dairy products that it sold as "organic." Consumers pay premium prices for organic products, but in this case—due to the illegal behavior of Aurora—they were ripped off. Aurora's practices violated both federal and California consumer protection and organic laws. There are several suits pending against Aurora for these practices. CSPI joined this litigation because of its commitment to honest organic labeling claims. CSPI will ask the Court to prevent Aurora from claiming that its products are "organic" if they don't meet the standards for organic products, and also ask the Court to force Aurora to disgorge all the profits it made from this illegal practice. QUORN. CSPI filed suit on behalf of a consumer who bought Quorn Naked Cutlets at his local Whole Foods store. Immediately after eating the product, a meat substitute made from fungus, he experienced a five-hour-long bout of cramping, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, followed by two days of stomach pain. CSPI has reviewed similar reports from more than 1,000 people. Both Quorn Foods and Whole Foods knew that Quorn causes "allergic and adverse reactions" but have refused to warn consumers of this risk. The federal judge first ruled that Quorn Foods should not be sued in Texas (where Whole Foods is based), and later ruled that Whole Foods Markets, Inc. was not responsible for the actions of Whole Foods stores.
ENVIGA. Coca-Cola and Nestlé make Enviga, an artificially sweetened green tea soda. They claim that the drink has "negative calories" and label it as "the calorie burner" on cans. But according to CSPI scientists who reviewed the studies cited by Coke and Nestlé, Enviga is just a highly caffeinated and overpriced diet soda. In December 2006, CSPI formally notified the companies of plans to sue if they continued using unsubstantiated calorie-burning and weight-loss claims. After Coke and Nestlé indicated that they had no plans to change the claims, CSPI filed suit in U.S. District Court in New Jersey, part of the region where the beverage was first sold. The case is proceeding. CLOSED CASESSARA LEE. Last December, the Center for Science in the Public Interest notified Sara Lee of its intent to sue based on misleading claims on labels for the company’s “Soft & Smooth Made With Whole Grain White Bread.” As part of a settlement agreement with CSPI, Sara Lee will make it clear the product contains only 30 percent whole grains rather than claiming the product is nutritionally equivalent to 100 percent whole wheat bread. The new labels will also state two slices of bread contain 10 grams of whole grains, and the government recommends consuming 48 grams per day. ANHEUSER-BUSCH. The Center for Science in the Public Interest notified Anheuser-Busch and Miller Brewing Company of its intent to sue the companies over caffeinated alcoholic drinks such as Anheuser-Busch's Bud Extra and Tilt, and Miller's Sparks. The drinks, dubbed "alcospeed" by CSPI, have more alcohol than beer and contain stimulant additives that are not officially approved for use in alcoholic drinks, including caffeine, taurine, ginseng, or guarana. No studies are available to support the safety of consuming those stimulants and alcohol together—but new research does indicate that the young consumers of these type of drinks are more likely to binge drink, become injured, ride with an intoxicated driver, or be taken advantage of sexually than drinkers of conventional alcoholic drinks. The viral marketing campaigns behind the drinks are clearly designed to appeal to young, and often underage, drinkers, according to CSPI. Unlike Miller, Anheuser-Busch agreed to talk and CSPI was able to reach a settlement without needing to file suit. As part of the settlement with CSPI, Anheuser-Busch will remove the caffeine, guarana, and ginseng from its alcoholic beverages Tilt and Bud Extra. The company, which also settled with 11 state Attorneys General, agreed to remove the Tilt and Bud Extra web sites until those drinks are reformulated without the stimulants, and the company will urge competitors to cease production of their caffeinated alcoholic drinks. SPLENDA. Splenda is an artificial sweetener, but its makers (McNeil-PPC, Inc. and McNeil Nutritionals, LLC) promote Splenda in a way that misleads consumers into believing that Splenda is a simply natural form of sugar without the calories: "Made From Sugar, Tastes Like Sugar." CSPI's consumer research surveys showed that consumers think that Splenda as "natural" or "not an artificial product." In truth, Splenda is a synthetic chemical that contains chlorine and is not natural. The Sugar Association sued McNeil on behalf of its members, to stop this deceptive practice. McNeil moved to dismiss the suit, claiming in part that the Sugar Association had waited too long to sue. CSPI filed an amicus curiae ("friend of the court") brief, advising the court that it is in the public's interest to stop fraudulent and misleading marketing at any point – even four years after the start of the deceptive Splenda campaign. The court agreed with CSPI's position, and denied the motion to dismiss.
QUAKER OATS. CSPI contacted Quaker about label and ad claims that significantly exaggerated the minimal effect oatmeal might have on lowering cholesterol. The company agreed to modify its claims. However, as part of its monitoring of settlements, CSPI discovered that Quaker had not in fact changed all packaging and advertising as it had promised, so negotiations with Quaker have resumed. CSPI also previously negotiated with Quaker to revise labels for several varieties of instant oatmeal and grits so that consumers would know that the products did not contain any real fruit, real butter, or real meats (ham, bacon), as the labels imply.
CADBURY SCHWEPPES. CSPI had also been in talks with Cadbury over its use of "natural" to describe 7-UP, also sweetened with HFCS. Within days of the suit against Kraft for Capri Sun, Cadbury agreed to drop the "natural" claim, and CSPI dropped a planned lawsuit against the company. Shortly after that, Cadbury agreed that it would remove "natural" from its Snapple brand as well. STARBUCKS. After CSPI publicized the possibility of a lawsuit against Starbucks for the presence of trans fat in numerous pastry products, Starbucks met with CSPI in July 2006. This meeting may have expedited Starbucks' January 2, 2007 announcement that it was immediately eliminating trans fat in half of its U.S. stores (with the other half changing by the end of 2007).
SCHOOL SOFT DRINKS. CSPI's negotiations with the major soft drink companies to get soft drinks out of public schools contributed to an agreement announced through the Clinton Foundation and the American Heart Association. Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Cadbury Schweppes agreed to phase-out sugary soft drinks from schools. FRITO-LAY LIGHTS. After a petition by Procter & Gamble and Frito-Lay, the FDA reversed as prior decision and allowed the companies to omit the warning on packages of foods containing the fake fat olestra, which causes mild to severe diarrhea and abdominal cramps in some consumers. Frito-Lay then removed all references to olestra, except in the ingredients statements, so that consumers would not know what they were buying. Sales of the products increased significantly, as did the number of adverse-reaction reports filed on CSPI's Web site. CSPI negotiated an agreement with Frito-Lay to change the labels of its chips to make the presence of olestra clearer.
BETTY CROCKER. After CSPI met with General Mills about their Super Moist Carrot Cake Mix, which has only a tiny amount of dehydrated carrots, General Mills put a front-label notice on the package to let consumers know that the product contains only carrot-flavored bits. AUNT JEMIMA (frozen) BLUEBERRY WAFFLES. Pinnacle Foods, the manufacturer, agreed to revise labels to make it clear that there was no actual fruit in the waffles and that the so-called blueberries were artificial bits. TROPICANA PEACH PAPAYA. At the request of a private attorney, CSPI joined in a lawsuit against PepsiCo based on the fact that Tropicana Peach Papaya juice drink (1) contains no peach, (2) contains no papaya, and (3) is not a juice. Shortly after CSPI joined the litigation, PepsiCo agreed to modify its labels for Tropicana Peach Papaya, Tropicana Strawberry Melon, and Tropicana Twisters (even though the last two were not included in the lawsuit) to make it clear to consumers that these are artificially flavored drinks with very little actual juice.
|
BURGER KING. The third largest U.S. restaurant chain is lagging behind competitors in removing the trans fat from its fried foods. That is putting Burger King's customers at a higher risk of heart disease. CSPI filed suit asking the District of Columbia Superior Court to order the restaurant chain to stop using partially-hydrogenated oil, the deadly trans-fat-laden ingredient, or at least to require prominent warning notices on Burger King's menu boards. Burger King tried to move the case to federal court in DC, but the federal court completely rejected Burger King's arguments and sent the case back to DC Superior Court, where it is now pending. Meanwhile, Burger King continues to scoff at the health of its customers and is the last of the big fast-food chains that has not switched from using trans fats.
KELLOGG. In a landmark legal settlement with CSPI, The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, and two Massachusetts parents, Kellogg Company agreed to adopt nutrition standards for the foods it advertises to young children. Foods advertised on children's media—such as Nickelodeon and other TV, radio, print, and third-party Web sites that have an audience of 50 percent or more children under age 12—will have to meet Kellogg's new nutrition standards. Also, it will not use licensed characters, such as SpongeBob, in advertising and on packages unless those foods meet the nutrition standards. For all products, Kellogg agreed to stop sponsoring product placements in children's media and to stop advertising in preschools and elementary schools.
CAPRI SUN. CSPI met with Kraft officials to obtain their agreement to stop calling Capri Sun drinks "natural" because they are sweetened with the very-unnatural high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Kraft initially refused but after CSPI filed suit against Kraft, the company announced that they were in the process of getting rid of the claim.
KFC. The primary purpose of this lawsuit was to force KFC to stop using oils rich in trans fat for frying and other purposes, or at least make the chain warn customers of the risks of partially hydrogenated oil. Several months after the lawsuit was filed, KFC announced that it would switch to a healthier cooking oil for most of its products. Presumably, the lawsuit accelerated KFC's action. CSPI dropped out of the lawsuit, which was filed jointly by a Washington law firm, as soon as KFC made its announcement.
FAT FREE PRINGLES. As with Frito-Lay, CSPI negotiated with Procter & Gamble to change the labels of Fat Free Pringles (now Pringles Lights) to make the presence of olestra clearer.
ARIZONA Rx TEAS. CSPI joined lawsuits brought by private plaintiffs after Arizona Beverages ignored an FDA warning that it was making illegal claims of disease prevention and treatment with its Rx line of drinks. The courts dismissed the claims, and FDA never took enforcement action. This is CSPI's only case that did not achieve the desired results.