Equal vs. Splenda: The Lawsuit

By Jeralyn, Section Law Related
Posted on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 10:39:00 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

I love fights over words. They remind me of the Clinton era and the battle over the meaning of the word "is."

Trial starts next week in a lawsuit by the makers of Equal against the makers of Splenda. For the record, I switched to Splenda years ago, when I got the impression, however founded or unfounded, that Splenda was the more healthy of the two.

The issue: What does the phrase "made from sugar" mean?

To me, "made from sugar" means the product began with sugar and got converted to something else in the manufacturing process. Equal, which has seen a huge dip in sales since Splenda began marketing its product, says Splenda is making a false assertion because there's no sugar in the product.

More...

The maker of Equal contends that Splenda has been misleading millions of consumers by fostering the notion, through television and print advertising, that Splenda is made from sugar and is natural. Splenda’s maker counters that the process to make the sweetener does indeed start with sugar.

Apparently, Splenda zaps the sugar out of the sugar. It claims Splenda

...is made from pure cane sugar by a patented process that makes three atomic changes to the sugar (sucrose) molecule. The resulting sweetener, called sucralose, retains the sweet taste of sugar.

Linguistically (if that's a word) speaking, I'm for Splenda. But, Equal is the underdog here.

In less than a decade, Splenda has come to dominate the American artificial sweetener market. Last year, it had sales of $212 million, dwarfing Equal’s sales of $49 million.

Who to root for? I'm conflicted. I want to root for the underdog, but I don't have a problem with Splenda's description.

Maybe we should just go back to Sweet 'n Low.

< In other news . . . Saddam Was Not Cooperating With Al Qaida | The Mystery of Faith >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Equal vs. Splenda: The Lawsuit | 20 comments (20 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Equal gives me a reaction (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by jrod on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 08:56:49 AM EST

similar to food poisoning, so you know I don't care for anything with aspartame. Splenda is so-so. I prefer good old Sweet and Low.

I suggest NO artificial sweetners! (3.33 / 3) (#7)
by lilybart on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 08:27:53 AM EST

Artificial sweetners set you up for cravings, because they trick your body into thinking you just had food, which you didn't, so your brain sends a signal---GIVE ME THE FOOD YOU PROMISED.

This is documented by research and by personal experience. I gave up diet drinks and all artificial sweetners and losing weight is much easier.

I would advise all who need sweetner, to use some real sugar or honey. We know what these compounds are!

: Bioluddites = worse than fringe conservatives (5.00 / 1) (#15)
by BlueCollarHeresy on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 01:54:27 PM EST

I've been using splenda to sweeten tea and as a sugar replacement in my cooking for the last year and I've never had the craving you're claiming it produces. We know exactly what sucralose is, btw: it's 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-β-D-fructo-furanosyl 4-chloro-4-deoxy-α-D-galactopyranoside. Long name, but it's not some engineered boogy man no matter how much bioluddites like you seem to want it to be.
There's only one trick to losing weight, eat less than you burn. That's it; no gimmicks, no complicated eating regimens, no fancy foods. Just eat less every day than you burn off.

Go with splenda (none / 0) (#1)
by BlueCollarHeresy on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 01:30:01 AM EST

I really hate to break it to the guys who make Equal, but splenda's nothing but specially chlorinated sucrose (i.e. table sugar). According to wikipedia, "It is manufactured by the selective chlorination of sucrose, by which three of sucrose's hydroxyl groups are substituted with chlorine atoms".

Not sure about you, but that sure sounds like Splenda is made from sugar to me.

For the record I use splenda in my cooking for that very reason. It's the closest artificial sweetener to sugar, both in taste and chemical profile, I've ever found.

I worked on this matter (none / 0) (#2)
by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 01:32:55 AM EST

for Splenda.

No comment from me.

I'll "stick" with honey (none / 0) (#3)
by Che's Lounge on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 01:38:10 AM EST

Connotations? (none / 0) (#4)
by ras on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 03:02:50 AM EST

I guess the real issue is whether the literal meaning of the words trumps one (or all?) of their possible connotations.

No chance in this suit... (none / 0) (#5)
by Richard in Jax on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 07:27:15 AM EST

No chance Equal. Splenda is a hybrid of sucrose. The table sugar molecule Sucrose has 3 of its -OH or hydroxy groups removed and the sites of the missing -OH's are filled with -Cl's or chloride ions. In other words 'its made from sugar'. The point here is that the flavor of sugar is desired while its caloric contribution is not. This rearranged molecule allows the taste to be experienced but there is no mechanism for it's metabolism so you pee it out.
Question? What kind of crappy coffee are you guys drinking that needs sweetener?

: I don't know how the suit will work out (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by nolo on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 10:59:32 AM EST

But I agree with the question about coffee. Once you quit sweetening it, you'll never go back (I know, because I quit doing it years ago). What's with people having to throw sweetening agents onto and into every danged thing they eat or drink anyway? It's like people want everything they eat to be candy or something.
Believe me, I'm far from being some sort of ascetic or moralist when it comes to food. I'm an enthusiastic amateur cook with very few moral or culinary qualms about any particular cooking ingredient. Nonetheless, I find that sweetening agents like processed sugar and honey are probably the least necessary "staple" cooking items in my kitchen. There are so many other naturally available ways to get great flavors (including sweet flavors) that I hardly ever find myself reaching for the sugar. From that standpoint, artificial sweeteners, except to the extent that they may be the only option available to certain people due to health restrictions, seem to me to be the most pointless "food" product ever created (except maybe for Olestra, but that's another story).

So the US spends about $250 million... (none / 0) (#6)
by madmatt on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 08:13:13 AM EST

on sugar substitutes and how many billions on sugar? No wonder I can't turn around without bumping into a diabetic....and sugar is what alcohol is made of so we know it is addictive. I'm pissed where is my freakin granola bar!

well then (none / 0) (#9)
by Jen M on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 09:05:07 AM EST

I want to sue Equal

'cause the name implies it is equal to sugar but it dont tast the same, feel the same, react the same so it ain't equal exept maybe color (but not texture or grain size)

The fact that Equal is arguing over words rather (none / 0) (#10)
by hellskitchen on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 09:42:46 AM EST

than safety tells me everything.

My daughter, who has cerebral palsy, won't touch the one product because of the chemical issues involving the brain that surrounds the product.

That doesn't mean the other product is safe (zapping the sugar out of sugar makes you wonder), but it does come from sugar and that's why I use it.

Hmmm (none / 0) (#11)
by Claw on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 10:42:28 AM EST

When I read this, I immediately thought of the commercial where Coke Zero wants to sue Coke for taste infringement.

Coke Zero is the most disgusting thing I've ever (none / 0) (#18)
by Teresa on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 03:32:47 PM EST

tasted in my life. I tried it once and unless I got a bad batch it was awful. The Diet Coke with Splenda is actually pretty good.


: I think they're both nasty (none / 0) (#19)
by andgarden on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 05:40:47 PM EST

Give me good ole NutraSweet!

Ain't nothing like the real thing.... (none / 0) (#13)
by kdog on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 12:15:18 PM EST

a pox on both their houses, Equal and Splenda.

My great-uncle was a regular user of artificial sweeteners, and was experiencing pain in his joints to the point he couldn't walk without his cane. He switched back to good old fashioned sugar and the pain went away, and he's back to enjoying his daily walk.

Equal... (none / 0) (#14)
by desertswine on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 12:37:02 PM EST

contains Aspartame, from Duke Nukem's old company. Is he still getting rich from Aspartame?
Reason enough for me not to buy it. Besides, this stuff makes your head explode.

Stevia! (none / 0) (#16)
by mad clamor on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 02:06:24 PM EST

What I don't get is why everyone doesn't use stevia. It comes straight from an herb, is calorie-free, and when extracted properly is tasteless and yet ~300 times as sweet as sugar. It's been used for centuries in Paraguay, 40 years in Japan, appears to be completely safe by all reasonable assessments, but as you might expect is banned in the US for sale as a sweetener because the FDA is owned by corporate interests.

But, you can buy it as a "dietary supplement," and I've been using it in my coffee and other drinks for a couple of years, and my wife and I are completely converted. Good stuff.

: Plus (none / 0) (#17)
by Jen M on Fri Apr 06, 2007 at 02:24:58 PM EST

It has fiber and inulin - good for diabetics
but $$$

Who woulda guessed it? (none / 0) (#20)
by squeaky on Sun Apr 08, 2007 at 07:57:09 PM EST

When Carter became President in 1976, Rumsfeld became CEO of the pharmaceutical company, G.D. Searle. In a chilling chapter, Cockburn traces how the new CEO used his Washington connections to help secure FDA approval of aspartame (aka, NutraSweet and Equal), an artificial sweetner that early tests linked to brain tumors. It made Rumsfeld a rich man.

I rarely use sugar, and never the substitutes, they taste bad to me.