Cheerios “Drug” Added to FDA’s High Priorities
BY: WC WINDBAG
Looks like General Mills in in trouble with the FDA. It appears the company is making false health claims on boxes of Cheerios:
The Food and Drug Administration scolded the makers of Cheerios about the way they promote the cereal’s health benefits. The FDA sent a letter of warning to General Mills accusing them of making unauthorized health claims.
Current boxes of Cheerios are touting what the company calls exciting news — the cereal’s ability to help lower cholesterol 10 percent in one month.
“My mother actually eats it every day, seven days a week for breakfast to lower her cholesterol,” Staten Island resident Lauren Schwam said.
According to a letter from the FDA General Mills’ advertising violates the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. The agency said claims that Cheerios ingredients can lower cholesterol within a certain amount of time, all while providing cancer-fighting and heart-healthy benefits, essentially makes Cheerios “a drug” by their definition. And no drug in this country can be legally marketed without an approved new drug application.
I had no idea that I spent my youth high on the Cheerios drug. That good feeling inside was not from a healthy breakfast, but a lie! Still, this is NOT going to stop the junkies who need their fix:
“It doesn’t change what’s in the box,” added Michael Zorek of the Upper West Side. “It’s healthy no matter what they say.”
No worries, the FDA will give General Mills 15 days to explain how they will change their box to remove this alleged truism that appears there. Since it is not a real drug, apparently, General Mills can not make such outrageous claims.
In a statement issued Tuesday, General Mills said this dispute is over language, not science. The company pointed out that the FDA’a complaint doesn’t actually question whether Cheerios can help lower cholesterol levels — it only talks about how the health benefits are advertised.
As for me, I may be thrilled that the FDA is utilizing our tax dollars on this important mission, but I’m still going to hide my Rice Krispies. You see, the last time I checked, there was no diversity with Snap, Crackle and Pop. Perhaps Kellogg’s should add three new characters to protect itself:
- Crunch – an African American bi-sexual
- Crispy – a female Muslim in a hijab
- Crujido – a Spanish speaking atheist
Now that would be inclusive and acceptable… that is unless the FDA challenges Kellogg’s for it claim that the sound you really hear is a “snap”, “crackle” or “pop”.
Hmmmmm…
- Open Thread - August 12th, 2010
- Fun Video of the Day - July 22nd, 2010
- Jimmy Buffet Channeling His Inner Obama - July 9th, 2010
- Shocking Poll of Elites: W One of the Worst Presidents Evah - July 2nd, 2010
- Funny Video of the Day - June 25th, 2010
It is not that the FDA is against Cheerios at all, it is simply that the nice folks that make Cheerios have chosen a marketing strategy that puts Cheerios firmly in the class of “drug to be regulated” rather than “food.”
Those specific regulations & definitions have been in place for years, practically since the inception of the FDA itself. The FDA under any other president (and I am far from an Obama supporter) would also have made Cheerios change the box or register as a drug.
Granny… thanks for reading our blog. Whether or not the FDA has anything against General Mills or not, you have to admit, classifying Cheerios as a drug just because they say “Cheerios May Reduce Your Cholesterol” on its box cover is a little over the top. It is obvious to me that eating a whole grain, low fat cereal like Cheerios can reduce health problems as much as eating any other healthy food. I don’t see the problem, and maybe this is a technical legal question. On its face, it is silly.
As for the Obama Administration, I was not taking a direct shot at them at all. This is an FDA issue, and I never mentioned Obama directly. On the other hand, I did infer that the Adminstration could probably make these types of issues go away for cereal makers if the companies were more PC. That is me being snarky.
Thank you Granny, you are correct.
Contrary to the point of view advocated in your reply, this is note “On its face, it is silly.”
The central question is not about Cheerios, but whether government should have a fair policy that treats every producer equally. That equal treatment prevents some companies from circumventing the law. Ultimately, the law is to protect the consumer.
If we don’t observe the law and defend it, then why don’t we just shut down the FDA.
Here’s what you are claiming (and how companies would evade FDA):
- Suppose I made a drug that solved a problem, say baldness. To sell it as a cure, I would have to go through double blind studies (expensive) to demonstrate it is both effective in its claim and has no adverse side effects, like death.
- Or, I could add it to the frosted flakes formula, call it frosted hair, bypass FDA and sell it under the slogan: cures baldness, eat it three times a day.
There is another dimension to the Cheerios claim (which would also occur under the frosted example above). People who eat something in the hopes of curing a specific condition should be under the care of a qualified physician. They should not rely on marketing slogans for their health.
I am astounded by how everything looks like a PC issue to the writers of this blog. Can we ever have a discussion rather than jumping on the “it’s a bit snarky” bandwagon?
Mike, I’m surprised we have this conversation about every 2-3 weeks. Our Meet the Bloggers page says this right up front:
This is what we do… we try to have fun with silly news like this, and we try to needle our political opponents at the same time.
Cheerios does not claim to cure cancer, provide erections, or grow hair. It does not imply that it is a substitute for aspirin, an equivalent to vegetables, or that you need to follow the directions of your pharmacist. What it does do is provide a low-fat, whole grain food product which any nutritionist will tell you is good for you, and by eating it in the portion recommended, MAY… I repeat MAY reduce your cholesterol.
Are we such a over-sensitive, uniformed public that we need protection from the FDA from such a claim? Is that really what you are saying… that the American people are so dumb that all products can not have marketing claims?
What is next, if Life cereal claims that “Mikey likes it” that they need to make sure that all Mikeys like it, or else it is a false claim that people will rely on?
Come on, this is really a silly thing. I can not see why you can not admit this. You seem to take every issue so seriously.
Do you get upset at your loved ones for wishing you a happy birthday, since they have not properly footnoted their claims and have made terribly offensive assumptions about your general welfare?
The FDA disagrees with you. Write to them.
My last comment, but feel free to reply.
I am not going to contact the FDA, because I assume that the lawyers for General Mills have this well in hand. I blogged about it because I thought it was both silly and a federal overreach… regardless if Obama or Bush was in office. My thoughts would have been the same.
You nice folks are looking at the wrong Cheerios box. This “Cheerios May Reduce Your Cholesterol” box is just fine. The box the FDA is slamming them for makes a specific claim that Cheerios will lower your cholesterol 10% in one month. That makes it a drug rather than food.
If you visit the link you posted up above to “false health claims” the box is shown to the right of the story.
Trackbacks
Family Favorite Cheerios under Attack: FDA, Go after “Truth in Advertising” of Global Warming Instead « Frugal Café Blog Zone
Hot News » Cheerios
Leave your response!
Our Growing Debt
Countdown Timer
in 26 months, 0 weeks, 3 days, 0 hours, 48 minutes, 53 seconds
Latest Illuminations
Subscribe to Posts
Categories
Authors
Archives
Center Links
Conservative Links
Great Forums
Liberal Links
The Great Illuminator
Most Commented
Tags