Unnatural Selection

Unnatural Selection

NaturalOpinion_JeffreyLau

The Food and Drug Administration needs to create stricter food label regulations and prioritize consumers’ rights

As a college student, grocery shopping is one of the most crucial yet hardest chores out there. With almost everything in the fruit-juice section labeled as “all-natural” and more in the processed food aisle, it is hard to determine what is actually “natural.”

Despite existing confusion, on Jan. 7 the Grocery Manufacturers Association submitted a letter to the Food and Drug Administration attempting to allow foods that contain genetically modified organisms be labeled as “natural.” This is only one example of many lobbying attempts made by the big-name food manufacturing companies. Oppositions from consumers have sparked many heated debates due to FDA’s lack of definition of the term “natural.” Whether this request will go through is uncertain; however the FDA has done enough dodging since 1992 when it comes to food labeling regulations. Clear and accurate food labeling is essential in order for consumers to make educated buying decisions. The FDA must take a proactive approach to tighten labeling guidelines and inform the public about what exactly is in their food.

Because the FDA currently lacks a specific definition of the term “natural,” companies have taken advantage of the ambiguity to lead consumers on. PepsiCo, the manufacturer of Naked Juice, settled a lawsuit last August regarding its use of the phrase “all-natural” on its fruit juice labels. The company argued that the phrase was meant to describe the fruits and vegetables rather than the vitamin boost chemically added to the drink. Completely unaware of the added chemicals, consumers argued that they were led to believe that the entire product was organic. Due to lax regulations, other companies are getting away with telling half the truth by hiding crucial information from consumers, while the FDA continues to do nothing.

A Jan. 8 Chicago Tribune article explained that similar lawsuits against General Mills and Campbell Soups and Gruma have made no progress to the current situation. The FDA dodged creating new regulations by rejecting action “in the context of litigation between private parties.” After years of neglecting the issue, the FDA needs to take action and conduct research to resolve the problem by setting strict labeling guidelines.

ChemistOpinion_JeffreyLau

In order to stop wasteful spending on both the part of food-manufacturing companies and consumer, a set of comprehensive and mandatory guidelines is needed. In 2011 and 2012, more than a million Americans petitioned for stricter labeling yet the FDA chose to remain silent. After spending nearly $30 million on a Washington state ballot initiative to mandate food labeling, the initiative was narrowly defeated and all efforts by pro-labeling advocates were wasted. In California, a similar initiative, Proposition 37 was also defeated by merely 2 percent. Due to the lack of mandate from the FDA, unnecessary money is invested into a problem that can be simply solved with federal support.

The drive against the food label debate is the fear of losing sales when negative information is presented on labels. However, contrary to common beliefs, consumers are more likely to purchase products with additional description about the ingredient, even if it is negative information. Cornell University Professor Harry M. Kaiser points out in a press release that “even seemingly negative information was valued over just the label itself.” This is further proven in a poll conducted by the New York Times shows that 93 percent of consumers favor some kind of useful description of the ingredients used on the label. The FDA should stand by the majority consensus and place consumer rights above private businesses.

Although food-manufacturing companies continue lobbying for a more lenient definition of the term “natural,” the FDA needs to take action to ensure transparency in food labeling and protect consumer rights. Consumers have every right to know what is in their food and what they are buying, and the FDA should stand by its principles and take a more proactive role to ensure the quality of consumer products.

Leave a Comment
More to Discover
Donate to The UCSD Guardian
$200
$500
Contributed
Our Goal

Your donation will support the student journalists at University of California, San Diego. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment, keep printing our papers, and cover our annual website hosting costs.

Donate to The UCSD Guardian
$200
$500
Contributed
Our Goal

Comments (0)

All The UCSD Guardian Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *