Jelly Belly sued by woman claiming she didn't know jelly beans contain sugar

Fox News ^ | 5/25/17 | Fox News Staff

[NohSpinZone]

When it comes to food, it turns out you can sue over just about anything these days.

A California woman is suing the makers of Jelly Belly jelly beans, claiming she was tricked into believing one of the company's candy products was free of sugar.

The plaintiff, Jessica Gomez of San Bernadino County, first brought the case against the candy company earlier this year, blaming "fancy phrasing" for her confusion over the ingredients, according to Legal News Line.

[Mariner]

Bullshit.

Even stupid people know Jelly Beans are full of sugar.

[Rusty0604]

Oh, thanks

[lucky american]

Jelly Belly Sports Beans? Did they taste like man sweat,jock straps, dirty socks, and stinky sneakers?

[SkyDancer]

“Her confusion” Hey, milk contains milk, peanut butter contains nuts not a dairy product ‘butter’.

[Rusty0604]

Found it. Funny.

[MNDude]

I have a similar lawsuit against pixie sticks.

[jjsheridan5]

Unless they have very different labels than are normal, no. The sugars listed under “carbohydrates” are refined, or naturally occurring, but makes no distinction between the two. The labels I have seen for these jelly beans lists “sugars”, but similarly makes no distinction between refined, and naturally occurring. My bag of brussel sprouts has “sugars” listed. However, it does not mean that they are “adding processed sugar during manufacture.” Similarly, a frozen dinner I have in my freezer lists “sugars”, but makes no distinction between naturally occurring sugars, and refined sugars.

The bottom line is that the “sugars” entry in the nutritional label is only valuable if you are concerned about sugars in general. If, like most people, you are only concerned with added refined sugar, but are not limiting naturally occurring sugars, it tells you nothing.

[jjsheridan5]

Even stupid people know Jelly Beans are full of sugar.

Can you give any explanation for their use of the phrase "evaporated cane juice", rather than the much more common "sugar", other than that they were attempting to deceive? Of course not. They know perfectly well that most people have no idea what "cane" is, and certainly have no idea what "evaporated cane juice" is, but 100% of potential customers know what "sugar" is.

This is blatantly deceptive.

The fact that most people "know" that jelly beans are full of sugar, people do not necessarily know whether those sugars are refined, or naturally occurring.

That is the purpose of nutritional labels. To give customers relevant information. And this was a clear attempt at deception.

[Mariner]

“They know perfectly well that most people have no idea what “cane” is, and certainly have no idea what “evaporated cane juice” is, but 100% of potential customers know what “sugar” is.”

Again, I call bullshit. There’s nothing deceptive about it. It is 100% correct. 100%.

[Rio]

[jjsheridan5]

So the 2g of sugars listed in a serving of brussel sprouts is added processed sugar? Because, according to what you just said, that means that they are adding processed sugars, even though the ingredient label does not list any ingredient other than "brussel sprouts".

Foods have naturally occurring sugars. The "sugars" column in a nutritional label does not distinguish between these naturally occuring sugars, and refined sugars. That is why you have to rely on the ingredient listing. And that is why using the phrase "evaporated cane sugar" (or "evaporated beet juice", or I think I have seen evaporated or concentrated orange juice listed, as well) is inherently deceptive. They know that most people are told to avoid added sugars, but not necessarily to avoid naturally occurring sugars, nor are people going to easily identify all possible sources of refined sugars (what if it had been "caramelized carrots"?, or "sweet potato extract"?, or, and the list could go on).

These types of tricks are blatant attempts at deception. There is no getting around it. You can make sweet candies without refined sugar. How, other than the nutritional label, are people going to know whether or not a particular candy is doing so, or not? In fact, there are plenty of recipes out there to make refined sugar-free candy. They rely on the naturally occurring sugars in whole foods. Is "evaporated beet juice" a refined sugar, or not. Judging from the overall "gee these other people are so stupid" tone from this thread, I get the sense that most people think they can make that determination, even though they probably cannot.

[Clutch Martin]

I was in Marion County one summer working some antenna towers and on a day off we all found ourselves at the Jelly Belly tour. It pretty neat, and enjoyable. Prior to that I never gave Jelly Beans much thought but the process was rather involved.

[jjsheridan5]

It is 100% correct. 100%.

It is 100% correct. And 100% deceptive.

[dfwgator]

And I thought the water was polish water.

This is Polish "water"

[editor-surveyor]

.
Amazing, isn’t it!
.

[COBOL2Java]

The woman must be weapons-grade stupid. Sugar is the first ingredient (no surprise).

Lawsuit Lottery!

[Pollster1]

I searched for Jelly Belly nutrition labels, and every one of them starts with "Sugar", usually followed by other sugars. Their jelly beans are clearly labeled as 70% sugar. The woman was a moron . . . and is now a fat moron.

[Trillian]

I’m glad I can find the strawberry jam ones again.

[Trillian]

I know a brand that can really clean her out.

[NorthMountain]

Now here’s a woman who could use a lifetime supply of Sugar Free Gummy Bears.

ROFL. She should start of by eating a whole pound or so of them ...