There is currently no official definition from the U.S. government for the term “natural” in relation to food products. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received numerous inquiries on this topic, prompting the agency to issue a brief statement: “From a food science perspective, defining a ‘natural’ food product is challenging because most food has likely undergone processing and is no longer a direct product of the earth. Consequently, 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 as long as the food does not include added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.” Nonetheless, consumers seem to possess an innate understanding of what “natural” means when they encounter it on packaging or ingredient lists.
This ambiguous situation forces manufacturers to navigate a delicate balance between innovation and consumer appeal as they invest in creating “natural” foods and beverages, all while attempting to market them effectively. Given the vagueness of the definition, how can a brand achieve success? There have been costly missteps in this arena. In 2014, General Mills reached a settlement regarding the use of the term “all-natural” on certain Nature Valley products. This agreement prohibits the company from labeling products that contain high fructose corn syrup or maltodextrin as “natural.” Similarly, in 2015, Diamond Foods settled a lawsuit by agreeing to compensate consumers who purchased Kettle Brand products with “natural” labels in the U.S. between January 3, 2010, and February 24, 2015.
Natural colors are increasingly essential for both manufacturers and consumers. Between 2009 and 2013, there was a remarkable 77% growth in the introduction of new products utilizing natural colors. Furthermore, statistics reveal that 68% of all food and beverage products launched in North America from September 2015 to August 2016 incorporated natural colors. A survey conducted by GNT Group indicated that the significance of ingredients varies by product type. For sweets and soft drinks, consumers often assume the presence of artificial ingredients—more than half of the respondents believed these products typically contain synthetic additives. However, over one-third would be more inclined to purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar items if they were made solely with natural ingredients.
Yogurt emerged as the most natural product among the surveyed items, with two-thirds of respondents unwilling to accept additives in that category and favoring products with only natural ingredients. The conclusion is clear: 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 poses potential legal risks, as consumers can easily initiate lawsuits challenging the ingredients. For the benefit of both manufacturers and consumers, it may be prudent for the FDA to establish a definition.
In the context of food manufacturing, understanding the calcium citrate reaction can also play a crucial role in formulating products that align with the expectations of consumers seeking natural ingredients. By acknowledging the importance of both natural labeling and the chemical reactions involved in food production, manufacturers can better cater to consumer demands while avoiding potential pitfalls associated with ambiguous claims. As the market continues to evolve, a clear understanding of what constitutes “natural” and the implications of processes like the calcium citrate reaction will be vital for brands aiming to succeed in this competitive landscape.