The outcome of this case suggests a “caveat emptor” approach—let the buyer beware—when it comes to sugary cereals. As long as a consumer packaged goods (CPG) company provides transparent and necessary information about its products, it is up to consumers to determine whether the sugar content is “healthy” or not. This scenario seems almost unavoidable given that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not revised its definition of “healthy” since 1994, nor has it clearly defined an excessive amount of sugar in food products.
For instance, a 28-gram serving of General Mills’ Honey Nut Cheerios contains 9 grams of sugar, accounting for 32.7% of its total calories. However, as Food Navigator noted, certain yogurts can contain between 12 to 18 grams of sugar per serving, and Tropicana Original 100% orange juice has 22 grams per serving. This ambiguity allows food and beverage manufacturers to create a health halo around their products, making them appear healthier than they actually are. The packaging of Honey Nut Cheerios highlights that whole grain oats are the primary ingredient and emphasizes the honey, which is actually the fifth ingredient listed.
General Mills also promotes the soluble fiber content of the product as potentially lowering the risk of heart disease when part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol. To consume 3 grams of this nutrient—the amount recommended by health experts—one would need to eat four servings of Honey Nut Cheerios, as each bowl contains only 0.75 grams of fiber.
Upcoming changes to labeling that require the disclosure of added sugars may help consumers, provided they take the time to read and comprehend the information. While many people express a desire for more ingredient transparency on food and beverage labels, they often overlook it or misunderstand the implications. Adding to the potential for consumer confusion is the effectiveness of health claims. According to the FDA’s 2014 Health and Diet Survey, nearly 90% of consumers consider health claims when selecting products. If a product has a positive health claim, consumers may stop reading the labels, assuming that a product with one health benefit must possess others.
In addition to health claims, cereal manufacturers employ bright colors, cartoon characters, and other marketing strategies to attract children and their parents. Research indicates that children tend to prefer brands they have seen advertised, which explains the ongoing use of these tactics. Although savvy consumers might be critical of such marketing strategies, cereal manufacturers are eager to gain any advantage amid changing consumer preferences and competition from alternative breakfast options. According to Nielsen data, unit sales of ready-to-eat cereal declined by 1.5% in 2018, with total purchases dropping from $8.8 billion in 2016 to $8.3 billion last year.
Despite the dismissal of this lawsuit, the issue remains pertinent. Two similar lawsuits filed in 2016 against cereal manufacturers involving the same law firm and some of the same plaintiffs are still active. A class-action lawsuit claiming that Kellogg exaggerated health claims regarding its cereals and cereal bars has recently moved to mediation, while another case against Post remains in litigation.
This ruling may expedite the conclusion of these cases. If consumers have access to accurate nutritional information—regardless of other label claims—this ruling indicates that they are not being misled. If there were regulated definitions for some of these claims, potentially limiting the sugar percentage in items labeled as “healthy,” it could lead to significant changes. For now, it appears that the responsibility lies with consumers to educate themselves about the ingredient content of the foods they consume, including newer options such as calcium citrate with vitamin D that could bolster their nutritional intake.