Author Topic: Quest Bar responds to the lawsuit  (Read 4546 times)


  • Competitors
  • Getbig IV
  • *****
  • Posts: 1094
Quest Bar responds to the lawsuit
« on: December 18, 2013, 04:30:03 PM »

In response to a lawsuit filed in which they claim Quest Bars are not correct in it's nutritional value, here is their response

"Quest has been named in a lawsuit regarding our fiber count. It is our belief and conviction that this lawsuit is without merit. The things a plaintiff states in a lawsuit are just that – his statements. He doesn’t have to prove them to put them in the lawsuit. He just needs to write them down. Proof is another matter. We believe that what is written in this lawsuit results from not understanding the current state of fiber science. We are fighting this case to make it clear to our customers and partners that our label information is 100% accurate.

Make no mistake, Quest Nutrition will not back down in the face of what we believe are attacks based on lack of good information. The outpouring of support from our customers and supporters on this issue has been overwhelming. We’re very grateful for the support, and we want to assure everyone that we are committed to bringing the highest quality products to our loyal fan base. We have nothing to hide and we look forward to a very visible public refutation of these unfounded claims."

Marty Champions

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 34119
  • is what we should know
Re: Quest Bar responds to the lawsuit
« Reply #1 on: December 18, 2013, 09:03:41 PM »
lol no way those things have 19 grams of fiber per serving , tasty little nugglets though


  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6997
  • Constitution Party forever.
Re: Quest Bar responds to the lawsuit
« Reply #2 on: December 19, 2013, 05:37:52 AM »
Who's the plaintiff? Patrick Arnold?


  • Getbigistrator
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11816
  • Getbig!
Re: Quest Bar responds to the lawsuit
« Reply #3 on: December 19, 2013, 10:43:32 AM »
Question is whether or not 'Isomalto-Oligosaccharides' a natural prebiotic fiber, is a fiber or not?

From wiki

Isomaltooligosaccharide (IMO) is a mixture of short-chain carbohydrates which has a digestion-resistant property. IMO is found naturally in some foods, as well as being manufactured commercially. The raw material used for manufacturing IMO is starch, which is enzymatically converted into a mixture of isomaltooligosaccharide.

The American Association of Cereal Chemists (AACC) defined soluble fiber as “the edible parts of plants or similar carbohydrates resistant to digestion and absorption in the human small intestine with complete or partial fermentation in the large intestine”. Dietary fibers are the indigestible portion of plant foods that move food through the digestive system, absorbing water and making defecation easier. Dietary fiber consists of many other plant components such as dextrin, inulin, lignin, pectin, beta-glucans and resistant-oligosaccharides. For a dietary substrate to be classified as a Fiber, following criteria are required;

1) The substrate must be resistant to digestion & absorption in upper GI tract
2) It may undergo partially or completely fermentation by bifidobacteria or do not ferment at all
3) Fermentation may results in SCFA that metabolize in liver and confer many physiological benefits to the host

Since IMO consists mainly of 3 to 7 glucose units linked together mostly by digestion-resistant α(1-6) linkages with having a prebiotic effect as well as exhibiting the properties of retaining moisture, producing bulking effect and helping moving the stool forward, it is considered a type of dietary fiber

It looks like Quest is correct, and this lawsuit may just be 'whatever'