What is Natural Food Anyway?

Acg67

Shocking, people are dumb or suffer from cognitive dissonance regarding "natural foods"

At little over a month ago, I discussed some of the ongoing legal challenges that are swirling around "natural" claims on foods. One of the big challenges is that the word "natural" is nebulous and is vaguely defined by regulators.

I thought I'd try to shed a little light on the subject by making use of the survey project I just started and asking consumers what they think the word means. In June, I added two questions to the survey. The first question listed 10 statements and individuals had to place them in a box that said "I believe foods containing this ingredient are natural" or one that said "I DO NOT believe foods containing this ingredient are natural." The order of items was randomized across respondents (sample size is 1,004, demographically weighted to match the US population, sampling error is about +/- 3%).

The results indicate that most people think added cane sugar, salt, at beet sugar are "natural" but HFCS, sodium chloride, and biotechnology are not. Interestingly, salt and Sodium Chloride are the same thing! Yet, using the technical/scientific name reduces the % perceiving salt as natural from 65.6% to 32%!

Processed foods are seen as least natural. "Processed food" is also a vague term. Is cheese a processed food?

The second question I asked was the following, "Which of the following best fits your definition of 'natural food'?" I gave four options, and here is the % of respondents choosing each option.

The majority of respondents thought that the best definition (at least among the four I included) was, "fresh foods with no added ingredients and no processing."

I suspect many of the foods sitting on a grocery store shelf that use the word "natural" do not meet this definition consumers found most descriptive.

http://jaysonlusk.com/blog/2013/6/11/what-is-natural-food-anyway

highervibes

Not every food will fit labels every singe time but I consider food natural if it doesn't require a nutritional label (for the most part) . I can already see some foods that I would still consider natural that do have one like butter, cheese and flax... but for the most part I see natural foods as being ingredients not having them.

yarwell

I consider food natural if it doesn't require a nutritional label

I guess that depends on your regulatory agencies, in the UK anything and everything can have a nutritional label on it.

I tend to agree that "natural" is too undefined. If taken as "the state it is found in nature" then wheat would be natural but not wheat flour. At the other end of the spectrum some would argue that if man has evolved and developed technologies that do things with food then those processes and technologies are natural too because man is.

highervibes

I consider food natural if it doesn't require a nutritional label

I guess that depends on your regulatory agencies, in the UK anything and everything can have a nutritional label on it.

I tend to agree that "natural" is too undefined. If taken as "the state it is found in nature" then wheat would be natural but not wheat flour. At the other end of the spectrum some would argue that if man has evolved and developed technologies that do things with food then those processes and technologies are natural too because man is.

Here in Canada fruits, veg, unprepared meats and fish don't have nutrition labels so I can definitely see your point. I would probably defer to the "is it an ingredient or does it have ingredients?" thing if I were in the UK. I know this can get sketchy too, but for the most part I think it would work out.

shannashannabobana

My mom is always telling me something or other is 'natural' and I always say 'hemlock is natural!'

As far as food goes, though, I figure if you are eating whole foods you prepared yourself or as close to it as you can get you are doing well.

yarwell

Here in Canada fruits, veg, unprepared meats and fish don't have nutrition labels so I can definitely see your point. I would probably defer to the "is it an ingredient or does it have ingredients?" thing if I were in the UK. I know this can get sketchy too, but for the most part I think it would work out.

Do we just end up with a debate about home cooking rather than prepared foods ?

I could bring home meat, veg, butter, flour, milk etc and make a meat pie, or buy a meat pie. At least in theory the purchased pie could be identical to what I would have made, so are both pies natural, just mine, or does it cease to be natural when it's turned into a meal or product and hence neither are.

highervibes

Here in Canada fruits, veg, unprepared meats and fish don't have nutrition labels so I can definitely see your point. I would probably defer to the "is it an ingredient or does it have ingredients?" thing if I were in the UK. I know this can get sketchy too, but for the most part I think it would work out.

Do we just end up with a debate about home cooking rather than prepared foods ?

I could bring home meat, veg, butter, flour, milk etc and make a meat pie, or buy a meat pie. At least in theory the purchased pie could be identical to what I would have made, so are both pies natural, just mine, or does it cease to be natural when it's turned into a meal or product and hence neither are.

If the meat pie was made with regular ingredients I wouldn't debate it being "natural" or not. If someone else made it in the same manner I would have, I would consider that natural. I'm sure not everyone has the same views as to what they would consider natural or not but that's just the way I would decide. Not saying I'm right, just explaining the logic I use to come to a decision on wheter ot not *I* would consider that food natural.

ldrosophila

My mom is always telling me something or other is 'natural' and I always say 'hemlock is natural!'

As far as food goes, though, I figure if you are eating whole foods you prepared yourself or as close to it as you can get you are doing well.

LOL I always say arsenic is all natural no added ingredients.

yarwell

Not saying I'm right, just explaining the logic I use to come to a decision on wheter ot not *I* would consider that food natural.

sure, but I think you're saying it's natural if it is made from natural ingredients, as opposed to it's only natural if it IS an ingredient.

bcattoes

Not every food will fit labels every singe time but I consider food natural if it doesn't require a nutritional label (for the most part) . I can already see some foods that I would still consider natural that do have one like butter, cheese and flax... but for the most part I see natural foods as being ingredients not having them.

I think the last sentence - I see natural foods as being ingredients not having them - fits my definition of natural foods.

A bag of dried beans or brown rice will have a nutrition label, but I consider these natural foods. But even this definition doesn't full cover it, as a bag of frozen mixed vegetables would have several ingredients, but I'd still consider those a natural food as long as there was no added sauces So, I guess if all the ingredients are natural then the combination is natural.

But honestly I don't really care about the label of "natural" too much. I just look at the nutrition and ingredients label (if there is one) and decide if I want the food or not.

highervibes

Not saying I'm right, just explaining the logic I use to come to a decision on wheter ot not *I* would consider that food natural.

sure, but I think you're saying it's natural if it is made from natural ingredients, as opposed to it's only natural if it IS an ingredient.

That would be a good assumption. Natural ingredients used to make something else would be cool with me. Its definitely not binary when you really get down to it.

Akimajuktuq

My mom is always telling me something or other is 'natural' and I always say 'hemlock is natural!'

As far as food goes, though, I figure if you are eating whole foods you prepared yourself or as close to it as you can get you are doing well.

LOL I always say arsenic is all natural no added ingredients.

We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you. The OP probably agrees.

I completely agree that "natural" food is something that is not processed. No ingredient list. Of course, some of our "natural" foods are questionable with GMO, pesticides, synthetic fertilizers etc. Many people are very deluded on what is "natural" food and the term is used extremely loosely by the food industry and it's easy to be aware of it if one has any functioning brain cells left. Everything we eat comes from nature in some way, but the label "natural" has become a scam.

sullus

I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

highervibes

We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you. The OP probably agrees.

Will I be able to find this at Whole Foods? lol My regular grocery stopped carrying arsenic :sadface

sullus

We are talking about FOOD. Are we so screwed up that we can't recognize what food is anymore? But if you think equating food with arsenic is a good argument to justify eating foods that come in a box; well, good for you. The OP probably agrees.

I completely agree that "natural" food is something that is not processed. No ingredient list. Of course, some of our "natural" foods are questionable with GMO, pesticides, synthetic fertilizers etc. Many people are very deluded on what is "natural" food and the term is used extremely loosely by the food industry and it's easy to be aware of it if one has any functioning brain cells left. Everything we eat comes from nature in some way, but the label "natural" has become a scam.

Heh. Can you not process that it's an adequate example to demonstrate that "natural" <> "good for you" That's all. Nobody "can't recognize what food is any more"

Are we so screwed up that nobody can recognize a rhetorical device to demonstrate the fallacy of the word "natural"?

highervibes

I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

I though it was just dumped out and strained? Not heated etc. (at least for raw honey anyways)

highervibes

"

Are we so screwed up that nobody can recognize a rhetorical device to demonstrate the fallacy of the word "natural"?

In all fairness the question is what is natural food, not natural <insert many things that are natural>

Natural has a definition, The OP's question refers to how we might interpret that to apply to our food. Urine is natural also. Is this going to turn into a thread about how many natural substances we can list and would never eat?

bcattoes

I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

I think it makes a big difference whether bees or humans add the enzymes. That's like asking whether it matters if humans add a bunch of chemicals to food or mother nature does. Sure it's all chemicals, but all chemicals in food are equal.

Honey from a bee hive is a far cry from HFCS. So is pure maple syrup, even though it is cooked to turn it from sap to syrup.

Sometimes it's necesary to not look just at words like enzymes and chemicals and use a little comon sense.

sullus

I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

I though it was just dumped out and strained? Not heated etc. (at least for raw honey anyways)

After it's been chemically processed. By bees.

cwolfman13

This thread will not end well....but in for the fallout

sullus

I always like Honey v HFCS in the "natural" debate. I consider Honey to be a highly processed (with chemicals, no less!!) food. They're basically the same thing - sugar water processed with enzymes, then evaporated to a sugary syrup that contains about 55% fructose.

Yet one's an all-natural wondersweetener, and the other is the most evil, guaranteed to give you the diabetus, sweetener that ever existed.

HFCS is no less "natural" than Honey. Why does it matter if a human or bee adds the enzymes?

I think it makes a big difference whether bees or humans add the enzymes. That's like asking whether it matters if humans add a bunch of chemicals to food or mother nature does. Sure it's all chemicals, but all chemicals in food are equal.

Honey from a bee hive is a far cry from HFCS. So is pure maple syrup, even though it is cooked to turn it from sap to syrup.

Sometimes it's necesary to not look just at words like enzymes and chemicals and use a little comon sense.

1. I don't.

2. How so?