SEARCH:
Sign in | Join | Help
search Mercola.com
 
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:





 
 Do you find this article interesting?
Comment on This Article Community Comments (28)
 
 
Posted On May 14, 2007
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




 
Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User, Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
Replied

TerryW
Novice User Novice User Joined On 5/2007
TerryW  
 
Posted On Jun 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??





jsp_203
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 4/2007
jsp_203  
 
Posted On Jun 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? 

 
 
 
Posted On May 15, 2007
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.

 
SamVed
Savvy User Savvy User, Joined On 5/2007
SamVed  
Replied

Jennie R
Novice User Novice User Joined On 5/2007
Jennie R  
 
Posted On May 15, 2007
I think that France's viewpoint on that is super. Wouldn't it be great if all countries viewed it that way?

Ethics in business... a growing awakening.


Patri
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 3/2007
Patri  
 
Posted On May 15, 2007
There are similar laws in other Euro countries as well, but France changing the constitution is a fantastic example.  I think Germany has or is in the process of this too.

Great link.  Thanks for posting it!



mediapusher
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 6/2007
mediapusher  
 
Posted On Jun 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?

 
 
 
Posted On May 14, 2007
Has anyone heard of Neotame..?(Russ)  It is apparently a derivative of aspartame but much sweeter.  I am concerned that it could become a replacement to Aspartame and we already know the dangers associated with this excitotoxin.   

Anytime I see products advertised as "No sugar added", the red flag pops up and I think "danger" because it usually means Splenda or some other artificial sweetener has been used.


   

 
LM36
Apprentice User Apprentice User, Joined On 12/2006
LM36  
Replied

Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
 
Posted On May 14, 2007
Neotame is aspartame 'on steroids', so to speak, and so cancer causing, so neuro toxic, and so bad for you, in any concentration, they can only dilute it in rail tankers of HFCS, to sell into soda. 

Neotame is another bad for you product from Merisant, the spin off, and separate company, from aspartame's Monsanto, that hoisted these sweeteners off their books, to try to avoid and deflect class action law suit liabilities, in KNOWN harm to humans.

Don't drink soda either, it could easily have masked and undeclared neotame in it, hiding under the aids to processing clauses, or flavor laws, of CFR (illegally).

 
 
 
Posted On May 15, 2007
I have read Dr. Mercola's information about Aspartame and it's dangers. I live in Canada. We have most of the sweeteners that the U.S. has but some we have may be strictly Canadian.
I would like to know if there is the same danger with the product
Sweet N' Low ( which contains cyclamate, as far as I know) as there is with Äspartame ?
I hope Dr. Mercola or someone on here can give me an authoratative answer.
Thanks.
Leigh Anne

 
Aleahsa
Apprentice User Apprentice User, Joined On 11/2006
Aleahsa  
Replied

Russ Bianchi
Savvy User Savvy User Joined On 9/2006
Russ Bianchi  
 
Posted On May 15, 2007
Sweet N'Low is sodium saccharin, or calcium saccharin, derived from a chemical derivative of coal tar. 

Of the 5 approved high intensity cheical (Not natural and not feom natural sources)vsweeteners in the USA, it is the least unhealthy, HOWEVER, you should NOT be consuming ANY high intensity sweeteners, PERIOD.

Read Dr. Mercola's SWEET DECEPTION for empirical clarifications.

 
 
 
Posted On May 14, 2007
At least someone has their head on straight!

 
Josh Rubin
Moderator User Moderator User, Joined On 6/2006
Josh Rubin  
Replied

Ferlie
Apprentice User Apprentice User Joined On 12/2006
Ferlie  
 
Posted On May 15, 2007
>>Health as a political issue - yes, on some levels - but not for everyone.  For the most of us, I think it is a very personal one.  It starts first at home.<<

Exactly.  FDA anyone?  Codex compliance anyone?  Look, this just isn't about nationality, it's about health and good decisions about eating.  Yes, that's always political but it's not about national boundaries.  Home is political as much as nation, in fact even more so because what we do at home influences our nations across the board.  If we're malnourished and drugged into compliance we can't act properly in response to national crises- if we're well-fed and drug-"free" then we're more able to rationally understand problems and deal with them.  It doesn't matter if we're Canadian, French, Chinese or effing Martians.  What matters is being rational, kind and acting like humans, not pre-programmed robots eating at the industrial complex trough- which if you hate any particular nationality you are guilty of.  There are good people everywhere of every nationality and every religion or lack there-of.  Not every Mayan ate a human heart, not every German took part in the Nazi horror, not every Martian wants to invade the Earth.  Look beyond national labels.  If you can't do that, then humanity is surely lost.

 
 
 
 
© Copyright 2009 Dr. Joseph Mercola. All Rights Reserved. If you want to use this article on your site please click here. This content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is required.
* These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. If you are pregnant, nursing, taking medication, or have a medical condition, consult your physician before using this product.