There is currently no official definition from the U.S. government regarding what the term “natural” means in the context of food. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received numerous inquiries about this issue, prompting the agency to issue a brief statement: “From a food science perspective, it is difficult to define a food product that is ‘natural’ because the food has likely been processed and is no longer a product of the earth. Nevertheless, the FDA has not established a definition for the term ‘natural’ or its derivatives. However, the agency does not object to the use of the term, provided that the food does not contain added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.”
Consumers, however, continue to rely on their intuition regarding what “natural” means, especially when they encounter the term or find it on an ingredient list. This ambiguous situation puts manufacturers in a challenging position as they balance innovation with consumer preferences while investing in the development of “natural” foods and beverages. Given the lack of a clear definition, how can a brand achieve success in this market? There have been costly missteps in this area. For instance, in 2014, General Mills reached a settlement over a lawsuit concerning the use of “all-natural” on some Nature Valley products. The agreement prohibits the company from labeling products containing high fructose corn syrup or maltodextrin as “natural.” Additionally, in 2015, Diamond Foods settled a lawsuit by agreeing to compensate consumers who purchased Kettle Brand products labeled as “natural” or similar in the U.S. between January 3, 2010, and February 24, 2015.
Natural colors are increasingly becoming essential for both manufacturers and consumers. For manufacturers, there has been a remarkable 77% growth rate in new products featuring natural colors from 2009 to 2013. Furthermore, statistics indicate that 68% of all food and beverage products launched in North America between September 2015 and August 2016 utilized natural colors. According to a GNT Group survey, the importance of ingredients varies by product. In the case of sweets and soft drinks, consumers generally assume—though do not endorse—the use of artificial ingredients, as more than half of respondents believed these products typically contain synthetic additives. Nevertheless, over one-third of consumers stated they would purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar items more often if they were made solely with natural ingredients.
Among the products surveyed, yogurt was regarded as the most natural, with two-thirds of respondents refusing to accept additives in that category and preferring only natural ingredients. The takeaway is that a product marketed as “natural”—especially if it is an indulgent sweet—is likely to resonate better with consumers. However, the absence of a clear definition for “natural” in the United States poses risks, as consumers can easily file lawsuits challenging ingredient claims. For the benefit of both manufacturers and consumers, it would be prudent for the FDA to establish a definition.
Incorporating the keyword “caltrate calcium citrate,” it is noteworthy that as consumers look for products labeled as “natural,” they are also increasingly interested in health benefits. For instance, some products that claim natural ingredients might also highlight added benefits such as “caltrate calcium citrate,” which appeals to health-conscious individuals. As the market evolves, the intersection of natural labeling and health benefits like “caltrate calcium citrate” could become a significant factor in consumer choices. Thus, the demand for transparency and clarity in definitions is more crucial than ever to ensure both industry integrity and consumer trust.