JOIN THE RACE

Sign in to save scores, appear on leaderboards and track personal bests.

Home› Food Receipts› Naked Juice vs Cheerios

Naked Juice VS Cheerios

Naked Juice Cheerios
Verdict DROP IT BUY IT
The Reality A consolidated class-action lawsuit in California alleged the products contained added synthetic vitamins and other ingredients inconsistent with the 'all natural' and 'non-GMO' labeling, including genetically altered soy in some varieties. PepsiCo settled in 2013 for $9 million while continuing to deny the labels were misleading or false, agreeing to redesign labels to eliminate or modify the specific claims at issue and to stop describing the juices as 'all natural' going forward. Consumers who purchased the products between September 27, 2007, and August 19, 2013, could claim up to $75 with proof of purchase or $45 without. On May 5, 2009, the FDA sent General Mills a formal warning letter finding these specific, quantified claims made Cheerios an unapproved new drug under federal law, since companies are legally barred from quantifying a specific percentage health benefit the way General Mills had. Critically, the underlying science itself wasn't in dispute: Cheerios' general soluble-fiber cholesterol-lowering claim had already been an FDA-authorized qualified health claim for 12 years at that point, and General Mills maintained the clinical study behind the 4% figure was genuinely strong. The issue the FDA flagged was specifically the precise quantification ('4% in 6 weeks'), not the broader, already-approved claim that whole-grain oat soluble fiber can help reduce cholesterol as part of a diet low in saturated fat.
SHORT ANSWER

Naked Juice: PepsiCo paid $9 million in 2013 to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging Naked Juice products labeled 'all natural' and 'non-GMO' actually contained genetically altered soy and added synthetic ingredients, and agreed to stop using the 'all natural' claim.

Cheerios: Cheerios' general claim that whole-grain oat soluble fiber can help lower cholesterol is a legitimate, FDA-authorized health claim with real science behind it -- but General Mills' specific 2009 quantified claim ('4% in 6 weeks') crossed into illegal, unapproved drug-claim territory and drew a formal FDA warning letter.