As of now, there is no official definition from the U.S. government regarding the term “natural” in the context of food. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been approached numerous times about this issue, leading the agency to issue a brief statement: “From a food science perspective, it is challenging to define a food product as ‘natural’ because it likely has undergone processing and is no longer a direct product of the earth. Therefore, the FDA has not established a definition for the use of the term ‘natural’ or its variations. However, the agency does not oppose the use of the term as long as the food does not contain added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.”
Despite the ambiguity, consumers seem to have an inherent understanding of what “natural” means when they encounter it, whether on labels or in ingredient lists. This ambiguous landscape poses a challenge for manufacturers, who must balance innovation with consumer preferences while investing in the development and marketing of “natural” products. The lack of a clear definition raises questions about how brands can achieve success.
There have been costly missteps in this realm. In 2014, General Mills settled a lawsuit concerning the use of the label “all-natural” on some Nature Valley products, preventing the company from marketing items containing high fructose corn syrup or maltodextrin as “natural.” Additionally, in 2015, Diamond Foods reached a settlement to compensate consumers who purchased Kettle Brand products labeled “natural” or similarly in the U.S. between January 3, 2010, and February 24, 2015.
The demand for natural colors is becoming increasingly significant for both manufacturers and consumers. Between 2009 and 2013, there was a 77% increase in the introduction of new products utilizing natural colors. Furthermore, statistics indicate that 68% of all food and beverage products launched in North America from September 2015 to August 2016 incorporated natural colors. A survey by GNT Group revealed that the importance of ingredients varies based on the specific product. For sweets and soft drinks, while consumers assume — yet disapprove of — the use of artificial ingredients, over half of the respondents believed that these products typically contain synthetic additives. Notably, more than one-third of respondents indicated they would purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar items more often if they were made solely with natural ingredients.
Yogurt emerged as the most “natural” product among those surveyed, with two-thirds of respondents unwilling to accept additives in that category, preferring only natural ingredients. The key takeaway is that products marketed as “natural” — particularly indulgent sweets — are likely to resonate better with consumers. However, the absence of a clear definition for “natural” in the United States renders it a potentially risky label, as consumers can easily initiate lawsuits challenging the ingredients.
Given this complexity, it may be prudent for the FDA to establish a definition to protect both manufacturers and consumers. Moreover, as health considerations grow, ingredients such as calcium citrate, known for their benefits to kidney health, may influence consumer choices in the realm of “natural” foods. The inclusion of such ingredients could also enhance the marketability of products, as consumers increasingly seek out items that not only claim to be natural but also support their overall health, including kidney function.