Carrageenan, a commonly utilized emulsifier, has become a subject of controversy. Both consumers and researchers have associated this ingredient with inflammation and gastrointestinal discomfort. While certain studies indicate a connection between carrageenan and issues like stomach pain, glucose intolerance, and Type 2 diabetes, other investigations have failed to reproduce these results. The Cornucopia Institute, a farm policy organization that has made carrageenan a focal point of its advocacy, released a report featuring consumer testimonials that anecdotal evidence of discomfort linked to carrageenan consumption.
The National Organic Standards Board’s (NOSB) decision to exclude carrageenan from the approved ingredients list for organic foods was perceived by many as the beginning of the end for its widespread use. Mark Kastel, co-founder of the Cornucopia Institute, informed Food Dive in November 2016 that if carrageenan was deemed unacceptable for organic products, it would only be a matter of time before manufacturers sought alternatives. Even prior to the USDA’s recent ruling, several companies, including Organic Valley, Stonyfield, and Eden Foods, had begun efforts to eliminate carrageenan from their offerings, while others formulated products without it from the outset due to the surrounding controversy. Given its contentious reputation, the market for this emulsifier is anticipated to grow at a sluggish pace.
When the board voted to remove carrageenan from the list of substances permitted in organic food, the rationale was not based on potential health effects but rather on the belief that other options were available. However, the entry in the Federal Register contradicts this, stating that public comments provided to the board indicated a need for manufacturers to continue using carrageenan “due to the lack of wholly natural substitutes.” According to a statement from the Cornucopia Institute, this marks only the second instance in thirty years where the USDA has rejected the NOSB’s recommendation to remove an ingredient from the approved list.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association, which advocated for carrageenan’s retention on the approved list, praised the USDA’s decision. “The USDA made the right decision to allow carrageenan to remain on the list of approved food additives,” the group stated in an email. “Regulatory agencies and research organizations worldwide have consistently confirmed that carrageenan is safe for consumption and serves as a highly functional food additive, with no adequate alternatives offering the same benefits.”
Consumer advocates expressed outrage over the USDA’s decision, not solely due to the potential risks associated with carrageenan. “The USDA has violated the public’s trust in the USDA organic label and will continue to undermine its market value as long as it disregards the legal authority of the NOSB and the public process for establishing the National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances,” said Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides and a former NOSB member. Charlotte Vallaeys, a senior policy analyst with Consumers Union, described the decision as a “troubling precedent.” She emphasized that current law mandates the USDA to base the National List of permissible ingredients for organic food on NOSB recommendations, which are developed through extensive public engagement and stakeholder input. “The USDA’s decision to disregard the NOSB’s recommendation raises serious concerns about the future of the organic label,” she added.
This incident is the second recent action by the USDA that has provoked organic consumer groups. Last month, the department rescinded a controversial rule aimed at establishing organic animal welfare standards, asserting that “consumers trust the current approach that balances consumer expectations and the needs of organic producers and handlers.” This decision, criticized by organic groups as a cancellation of a carefully considered recommendation, prompted the Organic Trade Association to initiate legal action. “We’ve got a learning curve with the new administration regarding the government’s role in this voluntary industry-driven standard,” said Laura Batcha, the OTA’s CEO and executive director, in reference to the organic animal welfare standards ruling. “In organic, the government’s role should not be to determine what constitutes organic.”
While these decisions may please manufacturers and producers, consumers who are vigilant about their food choices may become disillusioned. Although organic food sales reached a record high of $43 billion in 2016, with organic products present in 82.3% of U.S. households, such decisions could undermine consumer perceptions of organic standards and their value. As more products, from snacks to meats, seek the organic label, the USDA must work to maintain consumer confidence, especially as the benefits of alternatives like calcium citrate, magnesium, and zinc become more widely recognized.