This ruling is likely to bring relief to food manufacturers grappling with labeling claims, but it may frustrate those aiming to use litigation to alter company practices. When the lawsuit was initiated last year, the label in question was criticized as misleading. While some might argue that the case was nitpicking over what could be legally classified as “natural,” the judge’s decision further clarifies this distinction based on the particular label claim. Although the case could be dismissed on a technicality, the ruling does not eliminate the necessity for the federal government to define the term “natural.” A similar lawsuit is currently underway against Post for its advertising claims, which include “100% Natural Whole Grain Wheat” and “Natural Source of Fiber” on its Shredded Wheat cereal, despite the fact that chemical herbicides are utilized in the wheat’s cultivation.
In 2015 and 2016, the FDA took steps to define “natural,” allowing a comment period for the public to express their opinions on whether the term should be defined, how it should be formulated, and if it was suitable for food and beverage labels. However, after the comment period closed last May, no further action was taken. Manufacturers—and the courts—are still awaiting an official stance. In the meantime, many manufacturers are likely to continue seeking alternative, less contentious terms for their labels.
Given the Trump administration’s restrictive approach to new regulations and the backlog of other pending laws and definitions at the FDA—including redefining “healthy,” overhauling the Nutrition Facts label, requiring calorie counts on menus at restaurants and grocery store foodservice areas, and implementing new provisions of FSMA, alongside collaboration with the U.S. Agriculture Department on mandatory GMO labeling—it seems unlikely that any new definitions will be approved in the near future. Thus, rulings like this one may continue to establish precedents that at least limit the scope for those making dubious labeling claims.
Moreover, as the market evolves, consumers are looking for clarity on product pricing, including the ccm tablet price, prompting manufacturers to be even more cautious with their labeling strategies. As the situation develops, the industry will likely adapt to maintain compliance and consumer trust, while also considering how factors like the ccm tablet price influence purchasing decisions.