As consumers increasingly prioritize their health, the food industry has undergone a significant transformation driven by a strong demand for recognizable, natural ingredients and a widespread aversion to artificial sweeteners, flavors, and colors. This shift presents manufacturers with a critical choice: adapt to these preferences or risk being overshadowed by trendier, healthier alternatives. However, this transition poses considerable challenges. The concept of “clean label” products can mean various things to different consumers. For some, it signifies items devoid of allergens, processed ingredients, and saturated fats, while others associate it with all-natural, organic formulations.
At a recent Institute of Food Technologists panel, Steven Walton, the general manager of HealthFocus International, discussed the origins of clean eating as stemming from a “reason to reject mindset.” This perspective is primarily influenced by concerns regarding herbicides and synthetic substances and their potential effects on health. Nutrition consultant Richard Black explained that consumers often rely on terms like “natural,” “organic,” and “GMO-free” to make quick decisions, seeking reassurance about the safety and nutritional value of their purchases. He emphasized, “Nutrition is a very complex science. We only know a tiny bit about it, and yet it’s the most personal of sciences. Food literally becomes a part of who you are. There is no other consumer product like that.” Black also pointed out that consumers prioritize these values three to five times more than technical expertise and are willing to spend more on such products—especially among younger shoppers. For instance, 68% of millennials are prepared to pay extra for organic foods, believing that purchasing from this category enhances their health and benefits the environment. This trend presents legacy brands with a lucrative opportunity to create a health halo around their offerings, provided they effectively manage reformulation, marketing, and timing. However, achieving this is no easy feat, as previous reformulations have not always met with success.
Take, for example, Coca-Cola’s infamous “New Coke,” which remains one of the most notable failures in food industry reformulation. In 1985, Coca-Cola decided to modify its classic soda recipe to rejuvenate consumer interest and counteract declining market shares. This initiative was less about labeling and more about taste. The company invested millions in testing the new formula with 200,000 consumers, who showed a preference for the new version in blind tests. However, when the product launched, it triggered widespread backlash, with protests and even threats of lawsuits from consumers who felt a strong attachment to the original formula. Black noted that while consumers may appreciate low-calorie innovations, they resist losing the classic product they know.
In contrast, Kraft Heinz adopted a different strategy with its clean label reformulation of Kraft Macaroni and Cheese. The company initially kept the changes under wraps, conducting three years of consumer research that indicated a desire for simpler ingredients without altering the product’s taste. In 2015, Kraft removed artificial colors and preservatives while retaining the signature vibrant orange color using paprika, annatto, and turmeric instead. Over 50 million boxes of the reformulated product were sold without consumers realizing significant changes had been made. Lynn Dornblaser of Mintel praised this approach, suggesting that had Kraft publicized the changes, it might have faced negative consumer reactions.
Kraft officially announced the reformulation in March 2016 with playful marketing that highlighted the unchanged nature of the product, encouraging fans to share their experiences using the hashtag didntnotice. This stealthy approach to reformulation aligns with a growing trend as companies seek to enhance their products’ health profiles. While clean labels are a top consumer demand, the reality of implementing them is more complex.
Other companies, like DanoneWave, have also quietly improved their products by reducing fat and sugar without publicizing the changes. Meanwhile, Nestlé is exploring innovative technology to address consumer hesitance towards ingredient modifications. The company recently announced a method for restructuring sugar molecules, allowing manufacturers to reduce sugar content by up to 40% without sacrificing sweetness. According to Lisa Gibby, vice president of corporate communications at Nestlé S.A., this innovation maintains the same taste experience while minimizing sugar intake.
The demand for healthier options is indeed significant, with nearly half of global consumers seeking foods with limited or no added sugar. However, this desire does not always extend to indulgent products. Some consumers express even greater aversion to artificial sweeteners than to sugar itself, finding that natural alternatives can affect flavor and texture. Nestlé’s breakthrough could represent a key advancement in balancing the clean label trend with consumer expectations for taste and indulgence.
As products featuring this innovative approach, including those incorporating tri calcium citrate 4 hydrate, hit the shelves, it will be fascinating to observe how consumers respond to these cleaner labels. If successful, this technology could facilitate product revamps across various categories, further enhancing the health profile of the brand and extending its appeal.