How is this legal?

[DaveB]

This is about as misleading as I've seen. First Log Cabin packaged their "natural syrup" in a plastic jug to make it look like maple syrup but at least they called it "Natural Syrup" but how can you package something in a traditional maple syrup container and call it maple syrup and not even have a drop of maple syrup?

https://www.wholesomeyumfoods.com/shop/syrups/maple-syrup/

I can see consumers now being confused over this.

[maple flats]

I can see law suits coming

[ecp]

Call your state ag office and let me know. The maple industry will likely go the same way as the dairy industry at some point allow this type of think but I'd like to think it won't happen.

[DaveB]

Call your state ag office and let me know. The maple industry will likely go the same way as the dairy industry at some point allow this type of think but I'd like to think it won't happen.

I think everyone should make a call or send an email.

[30AcreWoods]

That's just nasty. Period. I bet VT won't allow it to be sold - likely there is already a law on the books there agains this type of thing. Here in NH, it's a **** free-for-all, but I'll reach out to our maple producers association.

[bigschuss]

I don't know....I took a quick look and it's pretty clear to me that that's not actually maple syrup. "Tastes like maple syrup" and "maple syrup substitute" and "unlike real maple syrup there's no blood sugar spike" are all pretty clear indicators you're not buying pure maple syrup.

[bill m]

I don't know....I took a quick look and it's pretty clear to me that that's not actually maple syrup. "Tastes like maple syrup" and "maple syrup substitute" and "unlike real maple syrup there's no blood sugar spike" are all pretty clear indicators you're not buying pure maple syrup.I would hope that as a maple producer there is no question that it is not real pure maple syrup. The label is misleading in that no where does it say "maple syrup substitute" but it does say "Naturally flavored from real maple" I can see how the average consumer could be mislead.

[bigschuss]

I would hope that as a maple producer there is no question that it is not real pure maple syrup. The label is misleading in that no where does it say "maple syrup substitute" but it does say "Naturally flavored from real maple" I can see how the average consumer could be mislead.

I don't know what the law says about labeling. I am more optimistic about people though. I would think that most consumers who prefer and can afford real maple syrup would spot this easily. Again, there are at least 4 or 5 references on that bottle that clearly indicate that the contents are not pure maple syrup. Will some consumers buy it thinking it is? Sure...maybe once and then they'll figure it out they got scammed. Will this in any way affect the bottom line of producers...I highly doubt it.

[DaveB]

If I labelled a product in big bold letters "MEAT" and then in a tiny font said "like product" and then said that my product tastes like meat because it's made from meat, you're going to assume that it's some kind of meat product.

Here, you have a product claiming to be a sugar free version of maple syrup. It then uses the ambiguous term "naturally flavored" and claims that it's flavor comes from maple syrup and is a 100% replacement for maple syrup. Is it maple syrup, NO. Is it derived from maple syrup, NO. Is it packaged like maple syrup? YES. Is it claiming to be basically maple syrup YES.

In my mind it's a misleading product feeding on consumers desires for a sugar free maple syrup. The key is that it's misleading and confusing which are both illegal. You can't call something that it's not.

[DaveB]

I don't know what the law says about labeling. I am more optimistic about people though. I would think that most consumers who prefer and can afford real maple syrup would spot this easily. Again, there are at least 4 or 5 references on that bottle that clearly indicate that the contents are not pure maple syrup. Will some consumers buy it thinking it is? Sure...maybe once and then they'll figure it out they got scammed. Will this in any way affect the bottom line of producers...I highly doubt it.

Those references mean nothing to an informed consumer. Believe me, outside of maple producing regions if you use the term maple syrup, people think of Log Cabin or Vermont Maid. To them that is pure maple syrup but the FDA has regulations barring the manufacturers from calling it maple syrup. It's called truth in labelling. This company is not doing that. They are calling their product sugar free maple syrup in big bold letters. There's no such thing as that.

How can producers expand their markets when people will think that products like these ARE maple syrup because they are labelled as such. I think producers should hold firm on only labelling products as maple syrup if it is maple syrup. Heck, I go one step further and say that companies shouldn't be allowed to call a food product maple unless it contains maple, but that's me. We know how that went for "milk".

[bigschuss]

If I labelled a product in big bold letters "MEAT" and then in a tiny font said "like product" and then said that my product tastes like meat because it's made from meat, you're going to assume that it's some kind of meat product.

Here, you have a product claiming to be a sugar free version of maple syrup. It then uses the ambiguous term "naturally flavored" and claims that it's flavor comes from maple syrup and is a 100% replacement for maple syrup. Is it maple syrup, NO. Is it derived from maple syrup, NO. Is it packaged like maple syrup? YES. Is it claiming to be basically maple syrup YES.

In my mind it's a misleading product feeding on consumers desires for a sugar free maple syrup. The key is that it's misleading and confusing which are both illegal. You can't call something that it's not.

I don't disagree with you. And again, I do not know what the law says SPECIFICALLY about labelling. EVERYTHING has fine print. I guess it's up to the lawyers to determine if this product is labelled illegally...or if it has just enough fine print to be legal. No idea? But just because something is aggravating or off-putting doesn't necessarily mean it's illegal.

[Baka]

To me, this one is more deceiving. And the VT National Guard serves it to their soldiers!

https://bgfoods.com/brands/vermont-maid/product/original-syrup/