'Natural' Ingredient Definition Requires Public Input

In a letter sent to the FDA, The Center for Food Safety – which describes itself as “a national non-profit public interest and environmental advocacy organization working to protect human health and the environment” – has urged the agency to gather the public’s input before attempting to define “natural."

It would be inappropriate to define natural without public participation.

The letter comes after a California federal judge’s request that the FDA define the elusive term following a class action lawsuit over the use of the term by Gruma Corp., a company that manufactures tortilla products. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers has stayed the lawsuit and requested that the FDA determine whether genetically-modified crops can be classed as “natural.”

A growing number of lawsuits are being filed over the use of ‘natural’ food labels, and Judge Rogers’ request seeks clarification over an often complex issue. While an FDA ruling on what constitutes “natural” food would ensure that future litigation has a benchmark to ensure uniformity, The Center for Food Safety’s letter warns that a definition made in response to the judge’s request could be “haphazard” and fail to achieve “general applicability.” The CFS has instead encouraged the FDA to achieve its definition of “natural” through the rulemaking process, which would require a public comment period.

Federal agencies must give the public the chance to comment on any final ruling under the Administrative Procedures Act, the CFS said, adding that two existing exceptions to this requirement do not apply in this case.

Law360 reports that “the FDA itself has previously acknowledged that it would be inappropriate to define ‘natural’ without public participation” and the CFS has stated that if the FDA were to come to a conclusion, “natural” foods should exclude any and all that have genetically modified ingredients.

The FDA reportedly asked the public for input in helping to define ‘natural’ as far back as 1991, but later decided that it was not a priority. In the years since, however, natural and organic foods have become big business and, as public awareness has increased, so too have lawsuits alleging that companies misuse the term on their products’ labels. While the use of ‘organic’ is tightly regulated by the USDA, ‘natural’ remains outside of the agency’s remit, as we reported back in June.

The time may have come for the FDA to take action. As judges look to the agency to provide guidance, the public may soon be called upon to speak up on an increasingly important issue.