Mead Johnson chucks chocolate-flavored formula

Posted June 9, 2010 at 12:30 p.m.

Enfagrow400.jpgTribune staff report | Mead Johnson Nutrition Co. said Wednesday that it would stop
production of a controversial chocolate-flavored

toddler formula that
critics claimed potentially promoted childhood obesity.

Mead Johnson said it would phase out its chocolate-flavored Enfagrow
Premium drink, aimed at children who are picky eaters, in coming weeks.
However, the Glenview-based maker of pediatric nutrition products
maintains that its product has a “superior nutritional profile” to fruit
juice and flavored dairy drinks typically consumed by toddlers.


“The resulting debate has distracted attention from the overall benefits of the brand,” Mead Johnson said in a statement.
 
Introduced in February, the chocolate-flavored formula was widely criticized in the blogosphere after Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, wrote that the drink would lead children to crave sugary beverages on her influential blog, www.foodpolitics.com.
 
“You want kids to be interested in eating a very, very wide range of foods because variety helps create nutritional balance,” Nestle said. “You don’t want them to think that every food needs to be sweet or salty.”

With nearly 19 grams of sugar per 7-ounce serving, the product drew criticism from parents and a flurry of media reports mentioning it in the context of childhood obesity.

“The resulting debate has distracted attention from the overall benefits of the brand, so we have decided to discontinue production of Enfagrow Premium chocolate toddler drink and phase it out over the coming weeks,” the company said in a statement on Wednesday.

The drinks were getting associated with infants, but company spokesman Christopher Perille said the drink was “a growing-up milk” for fickle toddlers who may not be getting all the vitamins and nutrients they should.

Enfagrow Premium will remain available in vanilla and three unflavored versions — Next Step, Gentlease Next Step and Soy Next Step — which have roughly half as much sugar as the chocolate version. The vanilla version has less added sugar than the chocolate version, but more than the unflavored versions, Perille said.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has said that feeding sweets to toddlers increases their interest in consuming more sugary foods and decreases their interest in more nutritious food. As a result, many doctors recommend limiting toddlers’ intake of sugary foods and beverages of all kinds.

Mead Johnson shares were up 2.5 percent at $49.95 in early afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

The Associated Press contributed to this story.

Read more about the topics in this post:
 

25 comments:

  1. Curious June 9, 2010 at 10:17 a.m.

    Whose idea was it to even produce this product? A child’s?

  2. Jefferson June 9, 2010 at 10:58 a.m.

    Curious | June 9, 2010 10:17 AM | Reply
    Whose idea was it to even produce this product? A child’s?
    No, Curious (how ironic of a name). It was an adult’s idea. Welcome to America. Where free markets used to be the way our economy operated. Not controlled by wack jobs in the education and non-profit sectors who have succeeded in scaring everyone about risks and perceived cost savings.

  3. Morons R US June 9, 2010 at 11:06 a.m.

    Isnt it sad that a company would be compelled to pull a product because people are over-sensitive to anything that could be bad? IF YOU DON’T LIKE SOMETHING, JUST DON’T BUY IT..LET PEOPLE MAKE CHOICES FOR THEMSELVES. There’s no guarantee that this product would be harmful and honestly, I would like for my son to be able to try something like this as a treat.

  4. Anne June 9, 2010 at 11:38 a.m.

    Free speach is gone in this country. A free market is also gone. Welcome to the U.S.S.A.

  5. sugar junkie June 9, 2010 at 12:05 pm

    The “food” industry is polluting bodies and turning what would have been normal people into obese addicts. It’s most horrendous when the victims are children.
    I was one of the original junk food junkies, I developed a sugar addiction when I was only 7 years old, and because of it I’ve battled excess weight my entire life. Prior to age 30 I suffered major depressive episodes and waged a 5-year battle against bulimia, both of which nearly cost me my life. Now approaching 50 I’m still profoundly unhappy with my inability to overcome my addiction. Through a tremendous amount of willpower I’ve managed to stay below the obese line, and I’m very fortunate that I have no physiological problems (BP, blood glucose, cholesterol, and all other lab work is always normal), but I worry about what’s in store for me as I continue to age. Will I eventually be so worn out from fighting this addiction that I give in and blow up?
    It saddens me to the point of tears that there are so many children who are becoming addicts and will face a life of difficulty and disappointment, and possibly serious medical problems too, all because our government allows companies to produce addictive garbage marketed as food. Worse, these companies spend a great deal of money targeting innocent children and ignorant parents because they know the garbage is addictive and they want to ensure that they have consumers (i.e., addicts) for life.
    Our government doesn’t allow pollution of land, water, and air to go unchecked, why does it allow such gross pollution of bodies?
    Anne, do you care about children? It doesn’t seem so.

  6. moonmac June 9, 2010 at 12:05 pm

    How can people sleep at night knowing they are a busy-body, know-it-alls that like to tell people how to live their lives. Mind your own FREAKING business! The reason why kids are fat is strictly their dumb, lazy parents fault. I have a free weight loss plan for your fat kids people. First day of fat training is mowing my lawn & raking all the grass. Second day clean out my gutters & clean the garage. 3rd day shampoo my rugs & wash all the windows. 4th day you can start painting the house, inside & out. 5th day they can rest after buring 10,000 calories they would of never burned sitting on their butts at home.

  7. Maureen June 9, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    Anne,
    How has what has transpired here give lie to the free market? A manufacturer marketed a product. Someone criticised the product and suggested that it was not a good choice nutritionally. Others piled on and were critical of the product. One can assume that sales have been stagnant. The product that doesn’t sell is going to be pulled from the market and the resources used to make & market the product are going to be placed elsewhere with the hopes of generating a profit.
    I can’t see how this story equals the loss of free markets & free speech. If anything, it affirms my belief in both.

  8. Jefferson June 9, 2010 at 12:51 pm

    sugar junkie
    The “food” industry is polluting bodies and turning what would have been normal people into obese addicts. It’s most horrendous when the victims are children.
    This ranks in the most absurd opening paragraph I’ve seen. How is anything flavored considered pollution and how do you draw the conclusion that assumed normal people then became obese, addicts or both.
    I hope you are not a registered voter.

  9. Ale June 9, 2010 at 1:04 pm

    I agree with moonmac. Unfortunately that requires parents turning the TV, computer off and supervising and helping out when needed. Next step in the plan would be walking or riding a bike to school as opposed to having mama drive you 3 blocks to school.

  10. Virginia June 9, 2010 at 1:14 pm

    The free market and free speech are both well represented here. The product was introduced. People exercised their right to speak out against that product. The company continued to market the product. You can be sure that if others in the market place decided to buy the product regardless of negative comments, then the company would stand their ground and continue to assert that this product provides a valuable option for parents of children in particular situations.
    You may like or not like how it happened, but free speech does not apply solely to the company marketing the product – others in the marketplace, including critics, can have their say as well.

  11. sugar junkie June 9, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    Jefferson, junk food isn’t just “flavored”, it’s doped. Educate yourself. Sugar is ADDICTIVE. It’s already been proven. There are many other substances that are also addictive. The “food” companies are well aware of this and they dope their products just like the cigarette companies doped their cigarettes to ensure a large number of addict consumers.
    I hope YOU are not a registered voter, you are very ignorant.

  12. RAK June 9, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    So why is the vanilla flavor not being pulled as well.

  13. Jefferson June 9, 2010 at 2:28 pm

    sugar junkie | June 9, 2010 1:30 PM | Reply
    Jefferson, junk food isn’t just “flavored”, it’s doped. Educate yourself. Sugar is ADDICTIVE. It’s already been proven. There are many other substances that are also addictive. The “food” companies are well aware of this and they dope their products just like the cigarette companies doped their cigarettes to ensure a large number of addict consumers.
    I hope YOU are not a registered voter, you are very ignorant.
    Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to debate the merit or addiction versus habit versus liking. Nonetheless, please feel free to pass on any relevant link or source proving, hell, I will even take a causal link, that sugar is addictive. However, the point of contention here is chocolate and not necessarily sugar.

  14. ignorance is not bliss June 9, 2010 at 3:04 pm

    Jefferson, your prejudice will ensure that you remain ignorant. Do you think cigarette smokers don’t give up cigarettes just because they “like” smoking? Do you think drug or alcohol addicts keep abusing because it’s just a “liking”, not a habit or addiction?
    Try PubMed. “Sugar addiction”.
    Train your toddler to prefer the taste of chocolate formula, then watch what happens when they have the ability to purchase or take chocolate-flavored junk “food” on their own. If the formula isn’t sugar-laden, I assure you this other “food” will be.
    The “food” manufacturers are knowingly creating a problem. They don’t care, it’s pure profit for them. I’m sure you would be opposed to them dumping garbage into a stream, but you don’t care that they dump garbage into human bodies, especially children’s bodies. Then don’t whine when the obesity epidemic continues to increase unabated and you’re forced to pay for the health care of the addicts.

  15. Tara June 9, 2010 at 3:09 pm

    Michelle Obama needs to stop focusing on exercise and start focusing on the food supply in this country. I think it’s great that she wants to help to solve the obesity problem, but lack of exercise is a symptom, it’s not the cause of the problem. The problem is the food supply.

  16. Morons R US June 9, 2010 at 4:10 pm

    The problem is NOT the food supply. The problem IS the fact that people don’t know how to eat properly and don’t get the exercise that they should to work off the calories they intake. Do we really want to live in a country that has to limit/monitor what we can and cant eat? People, especially kids, need to be educated on how to eat properly and if they do want to have junk from time to time, that’s ok. Just DON’T EAT IT ALL THE TIME.

  17. Doug June 9, 2010 at 5:34 pm

    I’m looking forward to the new pina colada flavor.

  18. Steve June 9, 2010 at 5:56 pm

    This is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. Who is it that buys that formula for the baby? Who feeds it to the baby? So now they have to stop making it because PARENTS are too stupid to even feed a baby properly?
    We’ve got a generation of “parents” who are just too inept to do the job. The lessons of their parents were lost a long time ago and all the information for YEARS about diet and nutrition has fallen on deaf ears. Good thing we keep passing more and more of the responsibility to the village idiots to do!
    How soon will it be before government has to regulate who can have children and sterilize those who are deemed incompetent?

  19. MadChicagoan June 9, 2010 at 6:08 pm

    I was in shape as a kid, and now as an adult. My parents did not allow me to eat any sugar, except on special occasions. I wonder if there was a connection there?

  20. Nick June 9, 2010 at 8:50 pm

    Good lord… Next thing you know, people are going to be suing JC Penny because their six-year old is dressing like a skank – blaming them for ‘promoting promiscuity’ by marketing mainstream clothing… You can’t honestly think it’s sane to blame these companies for your child’s obesity. I too, would like conclusive proof that sugar is addictive, and that people don’t just keep eating it and just wishing that if they hope hard enough, it’ll substitute the need for exercise. And furthermore, there are many people whose lifestyles involve consuming upwards of 4,000 calories a day, primarily athletes – these are among the most fit people in society. If you’re going to blame obesity on the food, you have to blame it on the lack of exercise as well. And just a little ‘food’ for thought, ‘Sugar Junkie’, with all the information nowadays about the dangers of cigarette smoking, don’t you find it curious that people are still picking up the habit? It’s not because of advertising, that’s for sure, the only airtime cigarettes get are in anti-smoking PSAs… It’s not peer pressure.. I’m 19 and in my second year of university and not once in my life have I been tempted to start smoking… I’m not saying parents don’t care about their children, I’m just saying that they only start the due diligence after the fact, and then feel the need to blame someone else, when in fact, it was the parents who put the kid to bed with a bottle of chocolate formula while they passed out drinking beer and watching COPS or whatever the hell it is these unfortunate members of society do to pass their time.

  21. Nick June 9, 2010 at 8:57 pm

    @MadChicagoan I ate sugar as a child and still eat sugar. I monitor my food intake, but usually consume over 2200 calories a day… I’m in great shape. I gained weight in my first year of university, but realized it was because I went from getting a lot of exercise to eating greasy cafeteria food and spending all day in class and all night studying or watching tv…Solution: I swim and run. As I said, I’m in fine shape and haven’t really altered my eating habits. Needless to say, the people who haven’t clued into the secret of exercise feel the need to blame the cafeteria for promoting unhealthy eating and blame them for becoming overweight, ignoring the fact that they themselves chose the french fries and pizza over the equally available grilled chicken and rice.

  22. sugar junkie is right June 9, 2010 at 9:29 pm

    Morons (good name for you), do you think that cigarette smokers and drug and alcohol addicts are just lazy and smoke, drug, or drink too much? And they should just exercise more and abuse less? Ever wonder why these people have such a hard time quitting? Why they can quit but start abusing again? Why some get sick and even die from their self-inflicted abuse?
    There is a certain portion of the population which is prone to become addicted to a particular substance. I drank quite a bit in my first couple of years in college but never became an alcoholic. I smoked cigarettes in junior high school but never became hooked on them. I used recreational drugs but never abused, and when they ceased to fit into my life I stopped with no problem. But sugar, sugar is my problem. I am totally hooked. I crave it all day long. I dream about it at night. It’s very difficult for me to shop or even walk down the street because it’s everywhere! The sooner our society understands that obesity is the result of a food addiction and lack of exercise is a SYMPTOM, not the cause of the problem, the sooner we can find a solution. In the mean time, millions of kids are being sucked into the awful world of junk food addiction, so much more tough to kick because we all have to eat to survive, and junk food is omnipresent. Why are there Godiva bars on display on the counters in the clothing areas at Macy’s??? Why are the cash register areas in any store lined with candy??? WHy is it necessary to have a Dunkin Donuts restaurant every 100 feet??? Why do some neighborhoods not have any grocery stores, but plenty of fast “food” joints and convenience stores peddling garbage?

  23. Morons R US June 10, 2010 at 1:11 a.m.

    Wow, that’s flat out idiotic. Just because you have a problem with eating and while yes, you may have a problem with addiction to food, that doesnt mean that food addiction is the overall problem causing obesity today. we currently live in a society dominated by technology. People walk less, watch more TV, have less chores around them that give them consistent exercise on a regular basis. That’s the overall reason that people are gaining weight, not to mention that fast food is much more accessible now than it ever was in the past. That’s not addiction, it’s not knowing how to live a proper, healthy lifestyle and has nothing to do with addiction. Me, personally, I’m probably about 40 lbs over what i should be. I dont eat any more or differently than what i did when i was in high school 12 years ago. I simply dont get exercise like i did back then. I dont blame this on anyone else but myself. I could easily exercise more than what i do but honestly, i feel i do pretty good and I’m happy and enjoy life. i’m not going to be an idiot and blame big business for “trying to get me hooked” on “addictive foods”. last time i checked, companies build businesses where they think they can be profitable. if they can make more money by building another restaurant a mile down the road, they certainly should. they certainly arent doing it to stuff you with donuts unless YOU WANT TO STUFF YOURSELF WITH DONUTS. Just because you might have an addiction to food doesnt mean that businesses are to blame and that they should change the way they market their foods. and honestly, get over the conspiracy theories, marketing practices occur because they MAKE MONEY. People dont have to buy stuff as they walk past a counter unless they want to. oh, and good call by using my moniker to slight me, that’s really intelligent on your part.

  24. Nick June 11, 2010 at 5:36 pm

    Win.

  25. Jerri Knoell June 17, 2010 at 11:59 a.m.

    Your blog keeps getting better and better! I’ve been following your posts for a while now and I have to say that your older articles don’t offer as much insight as the newer articles. Your writing is constantly improving! By the way, if you’re looking into placing some advertisements on your blog – you should really do it. Don’t go for all that 3rd party bs – Use a nice WordPress monetization tool coded by a friend of mine which by far the best, it’s a must have plugin for any serious blogger. You can find it at Thaidy.com/Top10WordPressPlugins and give it a free test-run (To make it easier for you, I linked my name to the site). Oh, and there is a nice discount coupon in the sidebar of the mainpage today.