Starbucks fans are angry over recent reports and legal action claiming the coffee giant is misleading customers by calling several of their drinks "sugar-free" when they are not. Or are they? Here's everything you need to know, according to an experienced registered dietitian.

What does the lawsuit against Starbucks claim?

Reports of a class-action lawsuit broke on October 2. The lawsuit, filed in Seattle on behalf of consumers, claims that Starbucks is misrepresenting several (eight, to be exact) of its protein-boosted hot and iced coffee and matcha lattes by calling them "sugar-free," when they actually contain several grams of sugar per serving. (More on that can be found below.)

In response to the suit’s filing, social media has exploded, likening the sugar in these so-called sugarless drinks to popular candy bars. There is some truth to this sugar debate — lattes are made with milk, and milk contains lactose, a form of natural sugar — but this does not mean these drinks contain the same amount of sugar as candy. Here’s why.

Added vs. Natural Sugars

When it comes to sugar in food, there are basically two main categories that account for where that sugar might come from: naturally existing sugar from fruit and dairy (a.k.a. lactose), or a host of other sweeteners that would have to be added to a recipe. Added sugars can come from white table sugar, as well as brown sugar, corn syrup and dozens more; honey, maple and agave are also considered added sugars when they are used to sweeten a food or beverage. While these added sugars have vastly different flavors and textures, they all contain approximately 15 calories and around four grams of carbohydrates per teaspoon.

Natural sugars are also accounted for on food labels but in a slightly different way. For example, one cup of plain, unsweetened yogurt or an eight-fluid-ounce glass of cow’s milk will show a "Total Sugar" content on the label (around eight grams and 12 grams, respectively), but the added sugar content will be zero grams, simply because no additional sugar was added.

Sugar substitutes like sucralose or Stevia are yet another avenue for adding sweetness to a food or beverage; these are not considered added sugars and do not count towards the added sugar tally. It’s important to note that Starbucks does disclose that their sugar-free syrups contain these types of sugar substitutes in their beverage ingredient lists.

Which Starbucks drinks are included in the lawsuit?

Eight Starbucks drinks are at the center of this lawsuit, including:

• Sugar-Free Vanilla Protein Latte
• Sugar-Free Caramel Protein Latte
• Sugar-Free Vanilla Protein Matcha
• Sugar-Free Caramel Protein Matcha
• Iced Sugar-Free Vanilla Protein Latte
• Iced Sugar-Free Caramel Protein Latte
• Iced Sugar-Free Vanilla Protein Matcha
• Iced Sugar-Free Caramel Protein Matcha
  

What's in a Starbucks protein drink?

Starbucks has enthusiastically entered the boom of protein-enhanced foods and beverages flooding menus and marketplaces. The coffee chain now offers a variety of protein-boosted beverages that get their extra protein from added milk, whey protein isolate and ultra-filtered milk (regular milk that has gone through some additional filtration steps that remove some of the lactose, leaving a larger concentration of protein).

A note on the Starbucks app and nutrition information:

You no doubt already use the Starbucks app to order beverages, but you can also utilize it to view nutrition information in the palm of your hand. If you were to look at any of the eight drinks mentioned above in the app, you would now see them listed under a "No Sugar Added Options" heading when toggling under the "Protein Drinks" category.

In the Starbucks app, a Grande Iced Sugar-Free Vanilla Protein Latte is described as follows: "This handcrafted Iced Latte blends bold, signature expresso with Protein-boosted Milk and sugar-free vanilla syrup for a smooth, delicious flavor with less sugar than our Iced Vanilla Protein Latte."

This description gives you a clear sense of what this drink is made of. When accessing the nutrition facts, you’ll notice it reads "Sugars 9g." This does not appear to follow the FDA’s mandatory format for food product labels, which says that Total Sugars and Added Sugars should be listed separately. Starbucks fails to do this, which likely contributes to customer confusion about how this information is presented.

When you click to view the ingredients of this same drink, the app will show that it contains: "ice, milk, brewed espresso, and sugar-free vanilla syrup," which is sweetened with sucralose. The final ingredients are listed as "whey protein isolate [milk], and sunflower lecithin."

While there are some semantics to hash out and the language and information on the app are unnecessarily confusing, they are accurate in the sense that there is no added sugar in this drink. As a registered dietitian who has educated many people over the past two decades on food labels, I agree that the ingredient list leaves me with some questions. However, based on the ingredients disclosed by Starbucks, there is no added sugar in this iced protein latte (if the ingredients they are disclosing are truly what they are using to make it).

Are all sugars created equal?

The answer to this question is a swift and true, No! Natural sugars from fruit and milk are not the same as what's found in candy. Foods like fruit and milk contain several other nutrients including fiber, protein and a slew of various vitamins and minerals such as calcium, vitamin D and potassium (three important nutrients most Americans don’t get enough of). The nutrients that come along for the ride not only positively impact a person's overall diet, but they also change the way we digest the nutrients. Fiber and protein help slow digestion, allowing you to better metabolize those natural sugars. Are you getting a ton of nutrition out of a latte? Also no — but you aren’t eating the equivalent of a candy bar, either.

The Bottom Line: Likening the sugar contained in these drinks to candy is not fair — or scientifically accurate. If Starbucks is guilty of anything, it may be the confusing language around its ingredients, nutritional info, and product naming and descriptions. The right registered dietitian could have helped prevent all this confusion (they can give me a call anytime!).

Related Content:

A Dietitian Breaks Down the David Protein Bar Lawsuit

Do Kids Really Need Protein Powder? Dietitians Weigh In

Are Functional Food Products Actually Doing Anything for Your Health?