潜水简介:
- Kellogg and Post cereals are under scrutiny in the California federal courts for claims that they falsely advertise their cereals as healthy despite the alleged "toxic" sugar content levels in the products,according to reports on the cases。
- 邮政以第一修正案的论点为辩护，说辩论的主张是无可争议的，政府没有禁止真实言论的管辖权。同时，凯洛格（Kellogg）正在挑战加利福尼亚州法官的制裁命令，该法官在诉讼中证明了三类消费者，反对简易判决本身，称原告律师未能解释为民事蔑视提出动议的理由，因此不承担任何责任另一方的法律费用。
- Both cases were filed by lead plaintiff Stephen Hadley in 2016.
潜水见解：
糖含量继续被放在显微镜下 - 在本轮上，法院。去年，美国医学协会asked the FDAto adopt front-of-package warning labels for items containing high levels of added sugars. However,the Sugar Association saidsuch warning labels would only mislead consumers because they aren't grounded in science.
A Kerry surveyfound that labels with "low/no/reduced' sugar claims"increased 45% last year compared to five years ago。With this lawsuit, Kellogg finds itself under fire for using that exact claim. The case centers on "lightly sweetened" advertising on Frosted Mini-Wheats and Smart Start cereals. Kellogg challenges the case by saying that it was civil contempt to not explain the basis of the filing to the company's legal counsel, but doesn't directly address the claims that are being contested in court.
The Post case is different as the cereal maker is in hot water for its prominent labeling of whole grain and vitamin content on its packaging, but without the context of its sugar content. The company argues that filing a case for deceptive health claims is difficult to prove as everyone has their own personal views on what healthy means and that the claims themselves on the box are truthful. If the courts accept that the cereal maker's labels are inherently truthful then it could be difficult for the plaintiffs to prove that the cereals are "unhealthy." Currently there is no legal definition of the word and labeling does not have a threshold at which nutrient benefits can be disqualified due to the presence of other unhealthy ingredients.
但是，最近受到质疑，维生素和矿物质之间缺乏背景。就目前而言，含糖或钠含量高的不健康食物仍然可以在其产品包装上宣传健康的维生素水平，但根据a paper in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, health claims should be better qualified on labels taking all ingredients into consideration.
Since both companies are in court for similar questions about sugar levels and their role in "healthy" claims, the verdict of this case could send ripple effects. If they win, it will be a clear sign that the FDA is going to have to step in if there is going to be any formal consensus on what appropriate sugar levels are in products. If they lose, it will be a winning blow for consumer health and label transparency advocates and force companies to rethink their labeling practices.
随着越来越多的有关标签实践的诉讼，据报道300 lawsuits over the use根据CBS新闻引用的分析，在过去三年中，食品上的“天然”一词 - 很明显，消费者希望透明度。但是，要真正改变事物，它很可能会介入FDA并定义一些更常用的术语和重新调整标签约定为了使公司持续重新评估其标签索赔。
