Erythritol Health Claims Lawsuits: a New Hazard for the Alcohol Industry

The zero-calorie sweetener erythritol, once positioned as a “clean label” substitute sweetener, is rapidly emerging as a litigation risk for beverage manufacturers. Recently published research suggests erythritol may contribute to oxidative stress and vascular dysfunction, with some studies linking elevated blood levels of this sweetener to increased risks of stroke and cardiovascular events.

While erythritol and other sugar alcohols such as Icomalt, Lactitol, Maltitol, Mannitol, Sorbitol and Hydrogenated Starch Hydrolysate (HGH), remain permitted under FDA food additive frameworks, the evolving science has already begun reshaping plaintiff strategies in consumer class actions. Industry attorneys warn that lawsuits increasingly focus on marketing claims such as “healthy,” “clean,” “natural”, “no artificial sweeteners” or “better-for-you”, alleged failure to disclose emerging safety concerns and comparative claims versus sugar or other sweeteners.

The rationale is that these sugar alcohols such as Erythritol are chemically derived during their processing steps. Although their starting ingredients are naturally occurring, the chemical reactions involved in processing them are not and therefore these sugar alcohols are in fact artificial.

This interpretation presents particular risk to the beverage industry because alternative sweeteners like erythritol are often used to position a brand to make these kinds of health marketing claims. While federal regulators still recognize erythritol as an approved ingredient, litigation trends may shift faster than regulatory action. Beverage and food companies should reassess labeling claims, consumer messaging, and risk disclosures related to non-nutritive sweeteners, even when ingredients remain FDA-authorized.