There is currently no official definition from the U.S. government regarding the term “natural” in relation to food products. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received numerous inquiries on this topic, leading the agency to issue a brief statement: “From a food science perspective, it is challenging to define a food product as ‘natural’ because it has likely undergone processing and is no longer directly sourced from nature. Nevertheless, the FDA has not established a formal definition for the term ‘natural’ or its derivatives. However, the agency does not oppose its use as long as the food does not contain added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.”
Despite the ambiguity surrounding the term, consumers seem to instinctively recognize what “natural” means when they see it on labels or ingredient lists. This creates a complicated scenario for manufacturers, who must navigate the delicate balance between innovation and consumer appeal while investing in the development of “natural” foods and beverages. Given the lack of a clear definition, how can brands ensure their success?
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 certain Nature Valley products. This agreement restricts 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. between January 3, 2010, and February 24, 2015.
The demand for natural colors is increasingly vital for 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 employed natural colors. According to a GNT Group survey, the importance of ingredients varies by product type. While consumers of sweets and soft drinks may assume the presence of artificial ingredients, more than half acknowledged that these items typically contain synthetic additives. Nevertheless, about one-third of respondents indicated they would purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar products more frequently if they were made solely with natural ingredients.
Among the products surveyed, yogurt was regarded as the most natural, with two-thirds of respondents rejecting additives in this category and expressing a preference for only natural ingredients. The conclusion is clear: a product that markets itself as “natural”—particularly indulgent sweets—is likely to resonate more with consumers. However, the absence of a definition for “natural” in the United States poses a risk for brands, as consumers can readily challenge ingredient claims through lawsuits. For the benefit of both manufacturers and consumers, it may be prudent for the FDA to establish a clear definition.
Moreover, with the rising interest in health, consumers are paying attention not only to food labels but also to supplements, such as calcium citrate, and their potential side effects. This awareness reflects a broader trend where consumers seek transparency and accountability regarding what they consume, whether it’s in their food or dietary supplements. As the market continues to evolve, both manufacturers and consumers will benefit from clearer guidelines and definitions surrounding terms like “natural,” especially in an age where the implications of ingredient choices, including those related to calcium citrate supplements side effects, are increasingly scrutinized.