Trader Joe’s, Welch’s slapped with lawsuits over ingredients lurking in ‘sugar-free’ foods

Health-conscious snackers are getting a bitter taste of reality.

Grocery giant Trader Joe’s and fruit-snack titan Welch’s are facing a barrage of federal class action lawsuits claiming their “sugar-free” and “no sugar added” treats are sweet little lies.

The legal onslaught centers on a trendy low-calorie sweetener allulose — which plaintiffs argue is, legally and chemically speaking, pure sugar.

A proposed class-action lawsuit filed against Trader Joe’s in Illinois federal court claims the cult-favorite grocer misled shoppers with its “no sugar added” dark chocolate chips because the product is sweetened with allulose.

Meanwhile, four separate lawsuits filed in California, Illinois, and New York this month takes aim at Welch’s Zero Sugar Fruity Bites, including its Mixed Fruit, Berries ‘N Cherries and Island Fruits varieties.

Those lawsuits similarly allege the snacks are marketed as sugar-free even though allulose is used as a sweetener — luring shoppers in to buy the product based on the promise of zero sugar.

Filed on Sept. 16, the complaint against Trader Joe’s argues that allulose is a monosaccharide, or simple sugar, and therefore falls within the regulatory definition of sugar. The claims state that it’s hardly a trace ingredient, either, and it’s actually listed second in the chocolate chips fine print — behind unsweetened chocolate and ahead of cocoa butter.

The Illinois consumers who filed the complaint, Erin Alexander and Hailey Worthy, accuse the California-based grocery chain of “health washing” to cash in on health-conscious shoppers looking to trim their waistlines.

“Defendant made its Representations about ‘No Sugar Added’ to its Product in order to induce health-conscious consumers, like Plaintiffs, to purchase the Product,” the complain reads. “But these representations are categorically misleading and false.”

The consumers maintain that they relied on the “no sugar added” representation, and if they had known it contained allulose, they either would not have purchased the chocolate chips or would have paid substantially less.

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters

The proposed suit seeks to represent consumers who bought the product in Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, and Washington.

The plaintiffs are asking for compensatory, statutory and punitive damages as well as restitution and attorney’s fees.

The lawsuits don’t necessarily claim that allulose has the same nutritional or metabolic effects as ordinary sugar.

Rather, they argue that companies cannot advertise foods as containing no sugar or no sugar added while using an ingredient that meets the regulatory definition of one.