BlaqueKatt
08-31-2009, 12:21 AM
story here (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/mar/27/schoolsworldwide.foodanddrink)
Apparently some schoolgirls wanted to prove that cheaper drinks had less vitamin C than advertised-instead they found that a popular brand had none despite the package claims of 4 times the amount of vitamin C as orange juice.
So they did what anyone would do-contacted the company-and were promptly dismissed. Did they stop there? Nope. They took it to the media-which backed them up and sent the info to a government watchdog group. The company tried to claim "oh the finished product has less but the concentrated syrup has more(despite the package label stating otherwise)-company is now facing fines and 15 charges of false advertising-now they're "thanking" the girls and claiming-oh it was just one type-we tested the rest and they're fine.....hmmm you lied once, got caught why should we believe you now?
Apparently some schoolgirls wanted to prove that cheaper drinks had less vitamin C than advertised-instead they found that a popular brand had none despite the package claims of 4 times the amount of vitamin C as orange juice.
So they did what anyone would do-contacted the company-and were promptly dismissed. Did they stop there? Nope. They took it to the media-which backed them up and sent the info to a government watchdog group. The company tried to claim "oh the finished product has less but the concentrated syrup has more(despite the package label stating otherwise)-company is now facing fines and 15 charges of false advertising-now they're "thanking" the girls and claiming-oh it was just one type-we tested the rest and they're fine.....hmmm you lied once, got caught why should we believe you now?