Comments on: Family Favorite Cheerios under Attack: FDA, Go after “Truth in Advertising” of Global Warming Instead

By: Delia

Delia — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 21:07:51 +0000

Give me a break!

By: admin

admin — Thu, 14 May 2009 23:53:39 +0000

FYI
From General Mills web site:

Resource for health professionals: http://www.bellinstitute.com/bihn/about_us/index.aspx?cat_1=28

The mission of the Bell Institute of Health and Nutrition and its staff of doctorate-and master-level scientists and registered dietitians is to help in the development of food products and nutrition information.

With backgrounds in nutrition science, public health, clinical nutrition and food science, Bell Institute experts are a valuable resource for the business teams at General Mills, as well as for health professionals around the country.

Scientists in the Bell Institute contribute to research on whole grains, micronutrients and breakfast, and publish research and scientific articles in leading peer-reviewed journals.

In addition, the Bell Institute also supports health professional organizations, sponsors educational efforts, and develops patient education materials and continuing education programs for health professionals.

By: Mark

Mark — Thu, 14 May 2009 22:16:55 +0000

Automobile manufacturers use standard safety tests conducted by others before they make claims that they are safer than any other car or avoid accidents. Same principle here. If you’re going to say that eating “x” servings per day of any product will reduce cholesterol, reduce the risk of a heart attack, or improve any other outcome you better have some objective evidence to back it up. Truth in advertising is the issue here. In the world of making health claims you need to have data just as you do when assessing safety of cars and that is a well accepted standard accepted by the majority of health care providers and scientists. To my knowledge, there are no data to say that Cheerios, by itself, can reduce cholesterol or the risk of a heart attack, or any other related outcome. The language the FDA used to warn General Mills was not the clearest and obviously the message was lost if you think they are trying to say that they are equating Cheerios to a prescription drug. But come on, listen to what’s being said rather than ranting on about one party’s or federal agency’s incompetence. Perhaps before you so freely and harshly criticize something like this you should do your homework or ask experts who do know something about this area.

By: stan

stan — Thu, 14 May 2009 13:02:35 +0000

The FDA is a joke. The law says that “only a drug can cure disease,” which is a complete lie. They don’t want you to think that a healthy diet can prevent any kind of disease, because the drug companies, who ‘own’ the FDA, can’t make a profit on healthy people. It’s in their best interest for peopl to get sick.

By: admin

admin — Thu, 14 May 2009 12:58:03 +0000

Kate,
Compared to other snack foods and other cereals in the US, the plain original Cheerios is indeed low in sugar. Sugar free? No, it’s not. But I’m OK with that for my kids. As you said, moderation in all things.

By: Kate

Kate — Thu, 14 May 2009 11:05:21 +0000

Hi
Are you sure that cheerios are low in sugar?

here in the Uk they certainly are not. In fact most cereals advertise themselves as low in fat and full of natural goodness but when you check the label, sugar is high in relation to their recommend bowl size.

However everything in moderation is oK

As for advertising, I can’t really comment as here in the Uk advertising is rather conservative after a few years ago when the govt introduced new rules about advertising to kids. But I must say they never used the term drug.

I guess we live in a world were extreme is the norm.

By: AFVET

AFVET — Wed, 13 May 2009 21:54:40 +0000

They are power junkies, and like any other drug, it will eventually kill you.

2010…we vote again.