News Item
New York Times: "Is Your Food ‘Natural’? F.D.A. to Weigh In"
Photo: Tony Cenicola/The New York Times
. . . With so many nuances and thorny questions to address, the F.D.A. could choose to ban the use of the word natural from labels entirely. Food labels have become so crowded with information — nutrition facts, organic certifications, claims about hormones, gluten, whole grains and G.M.O.s — that for many people it is difficult to figure out what to focus on, said Margot Pollans, an expert on food law at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University.
After a while, all the label claims can start to seem like white noise. But while “all natural” seems to confuse consumers even further, the F.D.A. is unlikely to forbid its use altogether.
“The problem that the F.D.A. would then encounter is the First Amendment – free speech,” said Marsha Cohen of U.C. Hastings. “The F.D.A. would have a very long road ahead of it to just ban the word completely.”
In the end, that may not be necessary. The fear of litigation has already caused food industry giants like PepsiCo, Frito-Lay, Campbell Soup and others to abandon their use of the word on products, said Jason J. Czarnezki, the executive director of environmental law programs at Pace University. Across the food industry, the number of products claiming to be “natural” fell to roughly 22 percent in 2013 from about 30 percent in 2010.
“I think companies are moving away from words that in some ways might be considered consumer fraud,” Mr. Czarnezki said.
The F.D.A. should nonetheless issue a strict definition of “natural,” he said — one that not only excludes artificial, synthetic and genetically engineered ingredients but that also restricts foods that have a large carbon footprint. Mr. Czarnezki said it is up to the agency to help consumers make sense of all the confusion.
“Even the most educated consumer can’t know what the word means,” he said.
Read more: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/05/17/is-your-food-natural-f-d-a-to-weigh-in/
