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 regarding this matter and has issued a brief statement: “From a food science perspective, defining a food product as ‘natural’ is challenging, as most food has likely undergone processing and is no longer a direct product of the earth. While the FDA has not established a formal definition for the term ‘natural’ or its variants, it has not opposed its use for foods that do not contain added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.”
Despite the ambiguity, consumers seem to have an innate understanding of what “natural” implies when they encounter it or see it on ingredient lists. This unclear situation forces manufacturers to navigate a delicate balance between innovation and consumer attractiveness when it comes to investing in the development of “natural” foods and beverages and effectively marketing them. Given the vagueness of the term, how can a brand thrive? There have been notable costly errors in this domain. For example, in 2014, General Mills reached a settlement over the use of the term “all-natural” on certain Nature Valley products, which prohibits the company from labeling items containing 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 labeled as “natural” or similar in the U.S. from January 3, 2010, to February 24, 2015.
The demand for natural colors is growing among both manufacturers and consumers. Between 2009 and 2013, the growth rate for new products utilizing natural colors surged by 77%. Additional statistics reveal that 68% of all food and beverage products launched in North America from September 2015 to August 2016 incorporated natural colors. According to a GNT Group survey, the significance of ingredients varies with the specific product. In the case of sweets and soft drinks, consumers are aware — but not supportive — of artificial ingredients, as over half of the respondents believed these products typically contain synthetic additives. Nevertheless, more than one-third of consumers would purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar products more frequently if they were made solely with natural ingredients.
Yogurt was viewed as the most natural product among the surveyed items, with two-thirds of respondents rejecting additives in that category, expressing a preference for products containing only natural ingredients. The conclusion is that a product marketed as “natural” — particularly 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 presents a potential risk for manufacturers, as consumers may easily file lawsuits challenging ingredient claims. For both manufacturers and consumers, it would be beneficial for the FDA to articulate a definition.
In this context, products that offer nutritional benefits, such as calcium citrate, magnesium, zinc sulfate, and vitamin D3 tablets, may also benefit from being labeled as “natural” if they meet consumer expectations for transparency and authenticity. By aligning with consumer preferences for natural ingredients, brands can enhance their marketability and consumer trust in products that contribute to health and well-being.