Food fight builds as U.S. regulators weigh 'added sugar' label

  • Currently 3/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

NEW YORK (Reuters) - In Washington, a pivotal battle over sugar is heating up. One small corner of the wider culture war over public health and sweeteners, this fight isn't about how much sugar should be in your food, but how much you should know about it.

U.S. food regulators say the public needs to know how much sugar manufacturers add to their products, beyond the sweetener that naturally occurs in the raw ingredients. Companies such asCampbell Soup Company say they don't need to inform the public, and that making a distinction risks dangerous confusion.


The move marks U.S. regulators' first significant step to address a growing clamor from health groups and scientists who say that excessive sugar consumption is a key culprit in the nation's obesity and diabetes epidemics.


"There's been an increasing drum beat on the part of public health advocates to give consumers that information," says Michael Jacobson, the head of nonprofit food advocacy group Center for Science inthe Public Interest, which has spent decades crusading to tackle high sugar levels.

Jacobson said he was "delighted and almost in disbelief" when he heard of the FDA's plans, which were announced in February.

Not everyone is thrilled. If added, the line would be a major blow for sweetener companies already battling each other in an overcrowded industry as the growth of America's massive sweet tooth stalls.






That stance remains a controversial one. Food manufacturers and sugar companies resoundingly say there is not enough evidence to suggest "added sugars" contribute differently to weight gain than sugars that are intrinsic to a piece of fruit.

"Sugar is sugar, regardless of the source," Campbell Soup Company, the maker of Pepperidge Farmand Prego products, wrote in a letter to the FDA.

"Giving consumers a false impression that reducing added sugars without reducing calories may actually delay finding a real solution the problem" of obesity, Lisa J. Thorsten, the company's director of regulatory affairs and nutrition, wrote.

The Sugar Association, which represents the makers of household brands, including Domino Sugarand Imperial Sugar, went further, saying the lack of scientific evidence to justify the line sets an "alarming precedent."




"The big difference between now and then (is) we have a system to provide the guidelines," saidFrancesco Branca, the WHO's nutrition department director. "We have credibility from the scientific point of view that make these guidelines easier to defend."


Some critics doubt the effectiveness of the so-called "facts panel" overhaul. The U.S. governmentearlier this year said that just around half of all consumers read the labels and make decisions based on the information.

"The people who read labels are the people who are already watching their health and their weight. This isn't going to cause a dramatic change," said Baylen Linnekin, head of nonprofit Keep Food Legal and a critic of the labeling measure as well as other government involvement in the food sector, including subsidies.


The regulators' move underscores the growing public scrutiny of sugar consumption, a trend that cheers Jacobson, who has targeted soda makers and sued food companies in a self-appointed role as the nation's "food cop."

Washington-based public relations specialist and industry advocate Rick Berman says Jacobson is in the "food hysteria business" and dismisses the anti-sugar craze as a fad.

With industry lobbying efforts building up, Jacobson, 71, said he is "not planting the white flag yet." But he is quietly savoring what could be the most meaningful step in his quest.

"It has been a long, long time."

Rate This Article
  • Currently 3/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
(Votes: 0) (Avg: 0.0)