• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Dietitians for Professional Integrity

  • Home
  • Our Team
  • Resources
    • Advocacy & Action Toolkit
    • Conflict-Free CEUs
    • Distinguished Dietitians
    • Ethical Sponsorship
    • FNCE Guides & Reports
    • Like-Minded Organizations
    • RD Resource Toolkit
    • Statements of Concern
    • Understand The Issues
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog
  • Donate
  • Search

Nov 10, 2015 Leave a Comment

Center for Science in the Public Interest Sues General Mills

How the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Foundation describes General Mills:

“Over the past 12 years, the General Mills Foundation has provided $7.5 million dollars in awards. For the second year in a row, the General Mills Foundation committed to awarding fifty $20,000 grants. The $1 million in grants will provide important nutrition and physical activity programming to nonprofit organizations, reaching 57,652 children and youth across the nation. General Mills is committed to nourishing lives through health and wellness.”

Very well. Now let’s read some highlights from the latest press release of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which is suing General Mills for misleading labeling and false advertising:

  • “General Mills markets Cheerios Protein, a cereal ostensibly much higher in protein than its original Cheerios. But according to a class action lawsuit filed today, Cheerios Protein has just a smidgen more protein than original Cheerios. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and private law firms filed the suit charging that General Mills falsely markets Cheerios Protein as a high-protein alternative to Cheerios, when in fact the main thing that distinguishes Cheerios Protein from Cheerios is that the former has 17 times as much sugar.”
  • “Cheerios Protein boasts on the front of its box that it has 11 grams of protein; four of those grams come from the milk, leaving seven grams from the cereal. Original Cheerios has three grams of protein. That four gram difference represents a small amount of protein— just five percent of the average American’s intake. But much of that difference is attributable to differences in serving sizes. Cheerios Protein has a bigger, 55-gram serving size, whereas Cheerios uses a 27-gram serving size. Two ounces of each cereal have just about the same amount of protein.”
  • “Consumers who buy Cheerios Protein probably think they’re doing themselves a favor, and that this more expensive product is essentially a protein-fortified version of original Cheerios,” said CSPI litigation director Maia Kats. “In fact, the main thing that distinguishes Cheerios Protein from original Cheerios is the huge amount of sugar and extra calories. With 17 times as much sugar as original Cheerios, Cheerios Protein is actually more conducive to diabetes, weight gain, heart disease, and tooth decay.”
  • “CSPI’s complaint also says that General Mills’ marketing on television and the Internet for Cheerios Protein is false and misleading. One ad featuring NASCAR driver Austin Dillon takes a child into a Cheerios Protein stock car and has him “fueled up” and racing off to school.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Related

Categories: Industry Spin Tags: Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Center for Science in the Public Interest, cereal, General Mills, healthwashing, sugar

Reader Interactions

Leave a Comment Cancel

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

sidebar

Blog Sidebar

Social Media

FacebookTwitter

Subscribe to receive our quarterly newsletter and other breaking news!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Browse by Topic

  • Academic Research
  • Advocacy
  • Distinguished Dietitians
  • Ethical Sponsorship
  • Industry Spin
  • Industry-Funded Research
  • Interviews
  • Photos
  • Problematic Sponsorship
  • Recommended Reads
  • Reports
  • Statements of Concern
  • Uncategorized

Tags

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics American Beverage Association Andy Bellatti Big Tobacco California Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Center for Science in the Public Interest CEUs Civil Eats Coca-Cola ConAgra conflicts of interest Corn Refiners Association FNCE front groups General Mills Global Energy Balance Network Hershey's industry-funded research junk food Kellogg Kids Eat Right Kraft Kraft Singles lobbying Marion Nestle marketing marketing to children Mars McDonald's meat industry Michele Simon moderation National Dairy Council Nestlé New York Times PepsiCo policy soda soda tax soda taxes sugar The Sugar Association Unilever World Health Organization Yoni Freedhoff

Footer

Subscribe to receive our quarterly newsletter and other breaking news!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Recent Posts

Farewell to Our Supporters

Dear DFPI Supporters, Since February of 2013, we at Dietitians For Professional Integrity have been a voice for uplifting the registered dietitian credential at a time when corporate influences - both overt and covert Read More

Highly Processed Foods Can Negatively Impact Health

Good read from New York Times on how highly processed foods (and the ingredients in many of them) can negatively impact health by creating an imbalance in the gut microbiome. This is the future of nutrition. The fact Read More

Social Media

FacebookTwitter

RSS

  • RSS - Posts

© 2021 Dietitians for Professional Integrity