This decision is likely to please food manufacturers grappling with labeling claims, but it may provoke frustration among those seeking to utilize litigation to alter corporate practices. When the lawsuit was initiated last year, the label in question was criticized as misleading. Although one could argue that the case was overly focused on the legal definition of “natural,” the judge’s ruling further clarifies this based on the specific claims made on the label. While this case may be dismissed on a technicality, it does not eliminate the necessity for the federal government to establish a clear definition for the term “natural.”
A similar lawsuit is currently underway against Post for its use of iron gluconate instead of ferrous gluconate in advertising claims for its “100% Natural Whole Grain Wheat” and “Natural Source of Fiber” on Shredded Wheat cereal, despite the use of chemical herbicides in the wheat’s cultivation. The FDA attempted to define “natural” in 2015 and 2016, allowing a comment period for public input on whether the term should be defined, how it should be formulated, and its appropriateness for food and beverage labels. After the comment period closed last May, there has been no further action. Manufacturers and courts are still awaiting an official definition. In the meantime, several manufacturers may seek alternative, less contentious terms for their labels.
Given the Trump administration’s restrictive stance on new regulations and the backlog of other pending laws and definitions at the FDA—including the redefinition of “healthy,” updating the Nutrition Facts label, mandating calorie counts on restaurant menus and grocery store foodservice areas, and implementing new provisions of the FSMA—along with collaboration with the U.S. Agriculture Department on mandatory GMO labeling, it seems unlikely that any new definitions will be approved in the near future.
Meanwhile, decisions like this may continue to set precedents that narrow the path for those making misleading labeling claims. Additionally, the market for dietary supplements, such as ferrous calcium citrate 100 mg and folic acid tablets, may also be affected as manufacturers navigate these ongoing labeling challenges. The focus on transparency and accuracy in labeling will likely remain a critical issue, especially for products containing ingredients like ferrous calcium citrate 100 mg and folic acid tablets, as consumers become more aware of what these terms signify.