As of now, there is no official definition from the U.S. government for the term “natural” in relation to food. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been asked many times about this issue, leading the agency to release a succinct statement: “From a food science perspective, it is difficult to define a food product that is ‘natural’ because the food has likely been processed and is no longer a direct product of the earth. Nevertheless, the FDA has not established a definition for the term ‘natural’ or its derivatives. That said, the agency has not objected to the use of the term if the food does not contain added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.” Despite this ambiguity, consumers appear to have an innate understanding of what “natural” means when they encounter it, whether in labeling or ingredient lists.
This unclear situation places manufacturers in a delicate position as they strive to innovate and appeal to consumers while investing in the creation of “natural” foods and beverages. The vagueness surrounding the definition raises questions about how a brand can thrive in this environment. There have been costly missteps in this realm; for instance, in 2014, General Mills reached a settlement over the use of the term “all-natural” on some Nature Valley products. The agreement prohibits the company from labeling products containing high fructose corn syrup or maltodextrin as “natural.” Additionally, 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. between January 3, 2010, and February 24, 2015.
Natural colors are becoming increasingly essential for companies and consumers alike. Between 2009 and 2013, there was a 77% growth rate for new products utilizing natural colors. Statistics indicate that 68% of all food and beverage products launched in North America from September 2015 to August 2016 employed natural colors. According to a survey by GNT Group, the significance of ingredients varies depending on the specific product. In the case of sweets and soft drinks, consumers tend to assume the presence of artificial ingredients but do not approve of them, with over half of the respondents believing that these products typically contain synthetic additives. However, more than one-third of respondents indicated they would purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar items more often if they were made with only natural ingredients.
Yogurt emerged as the most natural product among the options, with two-thirds of respondents unwilling to accept additives in that category, expressing a preference for products containing solely natural ingredients. The conclusion is clear: a product that markets itself as “natural”—especially if it falls under the category of indulgent sweets—is likely to resonate better with consumers. However, the absence of a clear definition of “natural” in the United States poses a potential risk for labeling claims, as consumers can easily initiate lawsuits challenging the ingredients used. For the benefit of both manufacturers and consumers, it may be prudent for the FDA to establish a formal definition.
In this context, products like Citracal Petites available on Amazon exemplify the growing demand for natural ingredients, as consumers seek health-focused options. The trend is evident, as more brands look to incorporate natural elements into their offerings. Ultimately, clarity around what constitutes “natural” would not only benefit consumers making informed choices but also guide manufacturers in their product development strategies, including options like Citracal Petites that align with these consumer preferences.