Posted on 05/22/2011 1:27:43 PM PDT by DannyTN
American sugar farmers and refiners have filed a suit to stop big corn processors from marketing high-fructose corn syrup as a “natural” product equivalent to real sugar.
The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles by Western Sugar Cooperative, Michigan Sugar Company and C & H Sugar Company, Inc., charges that the “corn sugar” branding campaign financed by the corn refining industry’s giant companies constitutes false advertising under federal and state law. The processors’ campaign was launched as a way to thwart declining sales of high-fructose corn syrup, or “HFCS.”
Companies named as defendants include Archer Daniels Midland Company, Cargill, Inc., Corn Products International, Inc., Penford Products Co., Roquette America, Inc., Tate & Lyle Ingredients Americas, Inc. and the companies’ marketing and lobbying organization, The Corn Refiners Association, Inc.
“This suit is about false advertising, pure and simple,” said Inder Mathur, President and CEO of Western Sugar Cooperative. “If consumers are concerned about your product, then you should improve it or explain its benefits, not try to deceive people about its name or distort scientific facts.”
The sugar producers seek an injunction to end the advertising campaign and also seek damages, including compensation for corrective advertising.
According to the complaint, consumers have increasingly sought to avoid food and drinks containing HFCS, because of its possible role in the obesity epidemic and other nutritional and health problems, or simply to avoid non-natural ingredients. As a result, food and beverage makers have been replacing HFCS with real sugar, and the corn refining industry has seen HFCS sales steadily decline.
The sugar producers charge the defendants with trying to resuscitate HFCS sales through a marketing blitz aimed at changing consumer perceptions of HFCS by equating it with real sugar. The defendants are attempting to do so, allege the sugar producers, by marketing HFCS as a natural sugar that is simply extracted from corn, which is not true.
While the corn refining industry has petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for approval to substitute “corn sugar” for “high-fructose corn syrup” on ingredient labels, the sugar-producing plaintiffs assert that the defendants did not even wait for the FDA’s response before beginning their “corn sugar” branding efforts. The complaint states that “Defendants’ resort to such literally false and misleading statements harms consumers, harms the makers of real sugar and harms any dialogue based on the truth. This lawsuit seeks to put an end to the deception.”
Why don’t the sugar companies get congress to drop the high tarriffs and subsidies and compete in a free market ...
Cancer cells slurp up fructose, US study finds
Study shows fructose used differently from glucose
* Findings challenge common wisdom about sugars
WASHINGTON Aug 2 (Reuters) - Pancreatic tumor cells use fructose to divide and proliferate, U.S. researchers said on Monday in a study that challenges the common wisdom that all sugars are the same.
Tumor cells fed both glucose and fructose used the two sugars in two different ways, the team at the University of California Los Angeles found.
They said their finding, published in the journal Cancer Research, may help explain other studies that have linked fructose intake with pancreatic cancer, one of the deadliest cancer types.
More here:
http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/02/cancer-fructose-idAFN0210830520100802
The FDA has stuck its nose in regulating everything else why not HFCS? Could it be that Archer Daniels Midland and the corn lobby have powerful friends in Congress and deep pockets for campaign donations?
I once tried to grow sugar, but the plants were too crumbly.
There has to be a connection between HFCS and the obesity-diabetes epidemic. That would be because HFCS just about completely replaced natural sugar as a sweetener when the epidemic took hold. It would be amazing if it is a coincidence.
I see that Dole is now listing “Sugar” as an ingredient. But I don’t trust them. Might still be HFCS. And, the new “Sensations” line is awful!.
Sugar prices are significantly lower here in Canada, than in the U.S. We don't subsidize the (beet) sugar industry, nor protect it with special tariffs. Most of our sugar is imported, at the world price — which is a lot lower than the protected price big sugar extracts from the U.S. consumer and tax payer.
The protectionism for big sugar resulted in the switch, by big food processors, to “corn sugar” (HFCS). HFCS (produced from the product of yet another heavily subsidized agribusiness) is cheaper than the overpriced sugar.
Government policies created the artificially high demand for HFCS. Now, ironically, more government intervention is being demanded to fix the problems that government intervention created.
You summed up the issue more succinctly than I; and have (IMHO) identified the only solution.
“The protectionism for big sugar resulted in the switch, by big food processors, to “corn sugar” (HFCS).”
The other way around. See my related post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2723427/posts?page=40#40
I found some Mexican Coke at Sam’s. It’s made with real sugar. My brother has found some Passover Coke (also made with sugar: kosher, unlike HFCS: not kosher).
***I once tried to grow sugar, but the plants were too crumbly.****
I never could get the cubes to sprout.
Sorry. I misread your post.
Got the picture?
How can this be? The anti HFCS folks claim that there is medical and scientific proof that HFCS is the cause of everything except athelete's foot. Rotting livers and mercury poisoning are killing half of the population, all due to HFCS.
Yet, in this article we have the "possible" role of HFCS in obesity and other health problems. Things that make you go hmmmmmmmm ...
Then we agree ... sweet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.