There is currently no official definition of “natural” as it pertains to food in the United States. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been asked about this term numerous times, leading the agency to issue a brief statement: “From a food science perspective, it is challenging to define a food product as ‘natural’ since it has likely undergone processing 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. However, the agency does not oppose the use of the term if the food is free from added colors, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.” Despite the lack of a clear definition, consumers tend to have an intuitive understanding of what “natural” signifies when they encounter it or see it listed among ingredients.
This ambiguous situation places manufacturers in a precarious position as they strive to balance innovation with consumer appeal while investing in the development of “natural” foods and beverages. Given the vagueness of the term, how can a brand thrive? There have been costly missteps in this arena. In 2014, General Mills reached a settlement regarding the use of the term “all-natural” on some of its Nature Valley products. The agreement prohibits the company from labeling any products 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 items labeled as “natural” or similar in the U.S. between January 3, 2010, and February 24, 2015.
Natural colors have become increasingly essential for both manufacturers and consumers. Between 2009 and 2013, there was a 77% increase in new products utilizing natural colors. Additionally, statistics indicate that 68% of all food and beverage items introduced in North America from September 2015 to August 2016 featured natural colors. According to a GNT Group survey, the importance of ingredients varies by product type. For sweets and soft drinks, consumers generally accept, albeit reluctantly, the presence of artificial ingredients, with over half of the respondents believing these items typically contain synthetic additives. Nevertheless, more than one in three individuals indicated they would purchase sweets, lemonade, ice cream, and similar products more often if they were made exclusively with natural ingredients.
Yogurt was deemed the most natural product among those surveyed, with two-thirds of respondents rejecting any additives in that category and preferring purely natural ingredients. The conclusion is that products marketed as “natural”—especially indulgent sweets—are likely to resonate better with consumers. However, the absence of a clear definition for “natural” in the U.S. presents a potential risk for manufacturers, as consumers can easily instigate lawsuits regarding ingredient claims. For the benefit of both manufacturers and consumers, it would be prudent for the FDA to establish a definition.
Additionally, with an increasing focus on health, some products have begun incorporating beneficial ingredients, such as 400 mg calcium citrate, to enhance their appeal. The integration of such components not only aligns with consumer demand for natural products but also boosts nutritional value. As the market continues to evolve, the presence of elements like 400 mg calcium citrate will likely become more common, further shaping the landscape of what consumers consider “natural.”