OK...I came across this article...that just reeks of stupidity, yet doesn't. My question here is should a woman be able to take to court a kids cereal company, because she's not bright enough to figure out what her kids are eating? Personnally, if they are getting a breakfast...that's better than NO breakfast. Yet if you buy them sugar to eat...then it's sugar they will eat. I mean come on even I know that cereal (most) are just sugar bombs...and I found that out when I was 8 or so.

I think this story is a perfect example of where we are as a nation today. Incredibly uneducated and expecting everyone to do the work for us. Also the "blind eye" we turn on consumerism...it makes me crack up at most folks ignorace on companies that clearly do not have the interest of the consumer at heart....and prey on the stupid people.

A lawsuit by a San Diego mother claims that lower-sugar versions of Cocoa Puffs and Froot Loops may seem healthier, but they're really not.

Jennifer Hardee has sued three big cereal companies, accusing them of misleading advertising through prominent "low sugar" packaging. She was surprised to learn from an Associated Press story last week that the new cereals have no significant nutritional advantage to regular versions of the popular kids' breakfast cereals.

Hardee, a Navy wife and homemaker with two young daughters who eat cereal, is suing Kraft Foods Co., General Mills Cereals, and Kellogg USA Inc., saying they intentionally misrepresent their products.

General Mills "never made specific health claims" for its reduced sugar cereals, said spokeswoman Marybeth Thorsgaard.

"Consumers wanted less sugar, so we gave them less sugar," she said. "Our packaging is clearly labeled with nutritional information that complies" with government regulations.

Post spokeswoman Abbe Serphos said the lower-sugar version of Fruity Pebbles was "part of the evolution of the product."

"There are some consumers who prefer an option with reduced sugar. And we're looking to see if there are ways to add additional nutrients like whole grain and fiber in the future," she said. "It's a process that takes time."

Kellogg declined to comment. The owner of a San Diego store where Hardee bought cereal, Del Mission Liquor, did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Howard Rubinstein of Miami, one of the lawyers representing Hardee, said the companies have intentionally misled consumers by displaying low-sugar labels prominently on the packages. Consumers don't always understand the details in nutritional labels, he said.

"A lot of people, quite frankly, don't have the educational ability to make those decisions. They rely on the one-line ad," he said Monday. "It is that kind of an ad that adds a lot of ambiguity, and it shouldn't."

Hardee was on vacation with her family Monday and was not available for comment, her lawyers said.

Hardee's lawsuit, filed last week in San Diego County Superior Court, seeks to force the companies to surrender profits from low-sugar cereals and to stop them from marketing the products as nutritionally superior.

The suit seeks class-action status on behalf of all California consumers who bought the new cereals believing they were healthier, said attorney Harold M. Hewell of San Diego.

Hewell said Hardee heard a broadcast report of the AP story last week that found there was no real advantage from the lower-sugar cereals. The AP had asked nutrition experts at five universities to review the new reduced-sugar cereals to see how they stacked up with the regular versions.

The nutrition scientists found both the old and new cereals had the same amount of calories, carbohydrates, fat, fiber and other nutrients. The AP story reported that manufacturers replaced the sugar with other refined carbohydrates to preserve the crunch.

The cereals examined were Kellogg's Frosted Flakes and Froot Loops; General Mills' Cocoa Puffs, Cinnamon Toast Crunch, and Trix; and Post's Fruity Pebbles. Only one, Cinnamon Toast Crunch, had fewer calories than the full-sugar version — 120 calories compared to 130 per three-fourths cup serving.

Hewell said Hardee "was extremely upset" to find that most of the reduced-sugar cereals had the same calories as the regular versions.

Can somebody please condense this story and sum it up for me?

Superspace boy tends to talk to much.

AsianBomb777 said:

What does V-I-C-T-O-R-Y spell?


Or maybe I need to sum it all up with a picture or 2?

superspaceboy said:

U SLUT!

AsianBomb777 said:

You keep saying that...like it's a pick up line or something.

superspaceboy said:

Stop jacking this thread!

AsianBomb777 said:

Dayummm and he says I talk a lot!
[Edited 3/28/05 15:54pm]

superspaceboy said:

where is cborgman anyways?
Anyone know?
I thought he was Twinklebitch but I guess they're different people.

AsianBomb777 said:

WHy don't you start a thread about it and STOP JACKING MY SHIT

superspaceboy said:

Look, I'm just trying to prevent this thread from sinking.
It seemed like it was going to die a slow, painful, uneventful death.

thanks a lot.

"Consumers wanted less sugar, so we gave them less sugar," she said. "Our packaging is clearly labeled with nutritional information that complies" with government regulations.



oh heck thats sum crazee SKEERY sheet right there

Ain't people like Jennifer Hardee ashamed that everybody knows how stupid they are?

I mean, If I was someone at Kelloggs I'd put her picture in every cereal pack:

STUPID:
1 :slow of mind
2 :dulled in feeling or sensation
3 :Jennifer Hardee

dying


dying


dying




dead

Mach said:

you know I worked on a study that helped shape the way we see nutritional content on packages. It was amazing at how little folks actually looked at it. I can almost still recall what it used to look like before the daily nutritional vallues were added and the content about FAT. It's been on labels for years.

As a consumer, I simply would not get my kids Fruity Pebbles or crap like that...maybe as a treat. But I'd stick with something a bit more traditional...like cherrios or something.

Not to say that these companies aren't trying to dupe the consumer...everyone should know this. Why people are blind to these simple facts, in general (like that guy who thought McD's was healthy) I'll never know. WHy companies can't be completely honest or not try to push JUNK onto you or me is another matter.

Deceptive marketing is everywhere.


Look at Yogurt with fruit on the bottom.
It's sold as a healthy alternative to other foods.

BUt the fact is that 75% of yogurt is a fructose/sucrose mixture. That translates to sugar. 75% of yogurt if friggen sugar!

Nasty nasty nasty.

i used to be a model for pure pac cartons (of milk) and we used fruity pepples in the add shoots


i dunno... ever since then ( i was about7-8 ) i started reading food lables and finding out all the things in them that were the big ole fancy names but stood for shit like seaweed and bleach and the such ...

freaky stuff the Gv lets food companys add into our foods...


skeery i tell ya