Americans desire a comprehensive food experience. They seek meals that are not only delicious and nutritious but also portable, satisfying their hunger, and made without dubious ingredients. According to Roger Clemens, this creates significant challenges for food and beverage manufacturers. Clemens, who serves as the associate director of the regulatory sciences program at the University of Southern California School of Pharmacy, has spent over four decades in the food and beverage industry and has observed that U.S. consumers are among the most demanding. “The U.S. population is an elitist population,” he stated in an interview with Food Dive. “They want something they can understand, something affordable, nutritious, beneficial, and safe. They want it all. Interestingly, they seem open to technology in every aspect of their lives except for food, which is quite ironic.”
As food technology progresses, the American appetite for the perfect meal—along with regulators’ push for enhanced nutrition in processed foods—has led to the creation of numerous preservatives, colorings, flavorings, and other additives designed to make the food supply appealing, affordable, and preserved. This transparency movement has prompted consumers to scrutinize food ingredients more closely, raising concerns about additives and inspiring them to seek alternative food and beverage options. While many ingredients on labels are safe—or even natural—consumers are increasingly wary of chemically-sounding terms.
Jeni Rogers, an attorney specializing in food regulations at Holland & Hart LLP, noted that companies are becoming hesitant to list items such as dough conditioners. “When you include a dough conditioner in your ingredients, it will have a chemical name that doesn’t convey the clean image that many companies aim for,” she explained. Although some additives serve functional roles, such as emulsifiers aiding mass production, consumers may shy away from products with ingredients they don’t understand. This hesitation can have dire consequences for a food company’s financial performance.
Experts agree that achieving a clean label—one that aligns with consumer desires for healthiness, taste, and straightforward ingredients—is a complex and risky endeavor. Jonathan Davis, senior vice president of research and development at La Brea Bakery and Otis Spunkmeyer, remarked, “We’re in a constant state of reformulating and updating our products across all brands. It never seems to end.”
While many acknowledge that clean labels are transforming the food industry, opinions differ on what constitutes a clean label. “People often mistakenly think that clean label and healthy are synonymous,” noted Justin Prochnow, an attorney with Greenberg Traurig LLP, who specializes in food regulations.
At La Brea Bakery, a significant aspect of their clean label initiative was to ensure all products were non-GMO certified. Davis indicated that for their niche market, non-GMO status is merely an entry-level requirement. However, the transition to clean labels for Otis Spunkmeyer’s cookies and cakes has proven more complicated, with a “no funky stuff” policy that eliminates artificial colors, flavors, and chemical sweeteners. The bakery’s wide range of products makes reformulation ongoing and challenging. “It’s all about simplifying ingredient declarations while preserving sensory attributes,” Davis explained. “Just when you think you’re done reformulating, you find new reasons to start again.”
Rogers noted that many small startups, which began producing natural and organic products in their own kitchens, face additional hurdles during scaling up. Ingredients such as emulsifiers and conditioners are sometimes added to improve mass production and shelf stability. Some companies implement training programs to help staff produce items without chemicals, but outcomes are mixed. “Sometimes the loss is too great, prompting a shift to formulations that may not be ideal,” she said.
As consumers become more label-conscious, they are also gaining awareness of the ingredients in their food. However, Clemens argues that their knowledge is often incomplete. Many people, even those in scientific communities, rely on “Dr. Google” rather than credible sources for food information. He emphasizes the importance of effective communication and education, yet notes that consumers frequently trust non-credentialed individuals over experts, often leading them to dubious sources.
Consumers generally prefer products with clear labels devoid of chemical-sounding names, but achieving this is not always possible. The FDA mandates specific labeling requirements that dictate how items are presented, and natural ingredients undergo stringent testing to ensure safety. For instance, while substances like calcium citrate may provide nutritional benefits, their presence on a label can deter consumers who find such names intimidating.
Davis has observed that as ingredient labels evolve, consumers are becoming increasingly demanding, often raising questions about enrichment processes in flour. While the inquiries are mostly constructive, changing consumer preferences will require some adaptation. For example, natural colors may not achieve the vibrancy of artificial ones, and removing certain additives can alter texture and taste.
Clemens illustrated this point using strawberry ice cream as an example. Consumers typically expect bright pink scoops with a sweet, robust berry flavor. However, a clean label version would likely be a pale pink or white, lacking artificial dyes. This color shift may prompt manufacturers to increase berry content, which could necessitate more emulsifiers—leading to the challenge of finding acceptable emulsifiers with non-chemical names.
Prochnow pointed out that while there are clean-label products that taste good, some reformulations focus more on ingredient lists rather than flavor. “It surprises me how often companies overlook taste,” he remarked, highlighting that even the healthiest ingredients matter little if the product is unpalatable. The push to reduce sugar has led to the introduction of natural sweeteners like stevia, which may not deliver the same taste.
For Davis and his teams, finding the right ingredients and partners for large initiatives is essential. “The biggest challenge is often working with suppliers who are resistant to change,” he said. While some suppliers have embraced the clean label movement, others remain entrenched in traditional practices, necessitating a search for new sources that can meet non-GMO requirements.
As the clean label movement gains momentum, it’s crucial not to overlook the importance of food safety and nutritional value. Clemens cautioned that a strict focus on clean labeling without regard for safety could inadvertently lead to nutrient deficiencies. Historically, products like flour and cereals have been fortified with vitamins and minerals to promote health, a practice that could be jeopardized if the clean label trend oversimplifies ingredient lists.
Both Davis and Rogers noted that the growing trend towards clean labels is making reformulation easier. “We’re improving our processes continuously,” Davis said. “Now that we have a range of approved natural colors and flavors, we can make incremental changes without reinventing the wheel each time.”