
- Nutritional Outlook Vol. 19 No. 4
- Volume 19
- Issue 4
What Will FDA Define as a “Natural” Sweetener?
In this issue, we turn to the always-hot topic of natural sweeteners. With certain stevia producers now purportedly on the cusp of bringing fermentation-derived stevia ingredients to market, as opposed to sweetener extracted solely from the stevia leaf, it’s an opportune time to revisit the debate over whether such fermented sweeteners are still considered natural.
With no real definition for the word natural, for now the conclusion is that natural-product consumers, leveraging their dollars, will ultimately vote on whether there is demand for fermentation-derived stevia, natural or not. If consumers like the price, taste, and sustainability benefits fermentation-derived stevia ingredients bring to the table, regardless of natural distinction, it will be a huge win for companies like Cargill who are hoping to kick off this new segment of the stevia market. (
But if FDA finally decides to officially define natural, and that definition ultimately somehow excludes fermentation production, what then? Would fermentation-derived stevia no longer be able to wear the “natural” halo so integral to the marketing of plant-derived sweeteners like stevia and monk fruit?
Well, FDA has been moving toward a definition and for the past half year been
Would FDA exclude fermentation from the definition of natural? On its
According to Chris Tower, president of monk fruit and stevia ingredients supplier Layn USA Inc. (Newport Beach, CA), FDA’s statements are “telling.” Ultimately, however, there’s just no way to know for sure whether the agency is likely to embrace fermentation. Aside from that, Tower says that where the average consumer will end up drawing the line “is the billion-dollar question.” Please turn to page 18 to read more.
Before I sign off on this issue, I’d also like to turn your attention to an important initiative that we at Nutritional Outlook are taking on together with our partners and readers: supporting the children of the water crisis in Flint, MI.
You’ve likely seen the news coverage: Flint’s change of water source in 2014 to the Flint River corroded plumbing, allowing lead to leach into tap water. With an estimated $1.5 billion price tag and 30-year time frame for pipe replacement, there simply is no quick or easy fix. But for affected adults and children, life goes on.
Nutritional Outlook wants to team up with the nutraceutical industry to come together in support of the Flint community. Can you help? Your generous tax-deductible donation to the Flint Child Health & Development Fund, established by the Community Foundation of Greater Flint, is an investment in the chance for Flint’s children to enjoy healthier lives. Nutritional Outlook’s parent company, UBM, and its nonprofit arm will match the funds that we raise together, according to the scale of our response. For more information, visit
Jennifer Grebow
Editor-in-Chief
Also read:
Articles in this issue
over 9 years ago
Editorial: Calling All Sports Nutrition Customersover 9 years ago
Chocolate Makers Focusing on Cocoa Flavanolsover 9 years ago
Astaxanthin: New Health Promises on the Horizon?over 9 years ago
Children and Dietary Supplements: Little Kids, Big Marketover 9 years ago
Dietary Supplement Production Challenges, Equipment Solutionsover 9 years ago
A 2016 Update: Promising New Science on Probioticsover 9 years ago
Weight-Management Supplement Strategies for a Skeptical Publicover 9 years ago
Stevia versus Monk Fruit: How Do They Compare in Formulation?Newsletter
From ingredient science to consumer trends, get the intel you need to stay competitive in the nutrition space—subscribe now to Nutritional Outlook.





