Kellogg’s Scooby-Doo: nutritionally groundbreaking?
Can something like this be nutritionally revolutionary?
Kellogg has just launched this cereal with just 6 grams of sugars per serving—half of what’s in most other cereals aimed at kids.
It’s also lower in sodium, but everything else about it looks pretty much the same:
Will Kellogg put money behind this cereal and market it with the millions it spends to market Froot Loops? Will it reduce the sugars in its other cereals? Will other cereal companies do the same?
Or will Scooby Doo suffer the fate of Post’s no-added-sugar and otherwise unsweetened Alpha Bits introduced in around 2005?
Post put no money into marketing the cereal and dropped it after just a few months (Alpha Bits now has 6 grams of sugars per serving).
Let’s give Kellogg some credit for giving this a try. I’ve looked for Scooby Doo in grocery stores but haven’t been able to find it.
I will watch its fate with great interest.
Update: Thanks to Cara for pointing out that with Scooby Doo, Kellogg adds a cereal to its portfolio that meets requirements of the WIC (USDA’s Women, Infants, and Children’s nutritional support program). As Jessica, a Kellogg rep explains, “The benefit of this cereal is that it’s WIC eligible and boosts several vitamins and minerals, is low in fat, is a good source of fiber and vitamin D and an excellent source of iron.”
And thanks to an anonymous writer for pointing out that Scooby Doo is directly competing with General Mills’ Dora Explorer cereal for the lucrative WIC market, one that should amount to nearly $7 billion in 2013. WIC specifies what the benefits can be used to buy. Cereal companies want to be sure they are in that market.