Are Consumers Really Limiting ‘Demonized’ Ingredients?

Whether it be the influence of the pandemic or U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, discussions about seed oils, artificial colors and sweeteners and ultraprocessed foods (UPF) have dominated the food and beverage sector over the past year.

Large corporations are feeling the pressure. In the past month alone, The Hershey Company, Kraft Heinz, Nestlé, Conagra and The J.M. Smucker Co. have pledged to remove FD&C colors by 2027. The moves follow Kennedy’s April announcement of a new directive for food manufacturers to phase out eight synthetic dyes used in the formulation of thousands of food products.

Despite the controversy surrounding these “demonized” ingredients, only 36% of North American consumers describe their approach to healthy eating as limiting ingredients that are “bad” for them, according to new data from Innova Market Insights.

• Additionally, the report found that many consumers don’t check the ingredient lists for food and beverage products they purchase.
• Forty-one percent of survey participants report consuming UPFs because they are affordable and taste good. What’s more, 37% are willing to compromise on natural flavors for a product to taste good.

“Our research shows that affordability and enjoyment are strong drivers of food choice, while demonized ingredients are not a concern for most consumers. The current political landscape and weakened regulatory environment are poised to ramp up the demonization of [these] ingredients, but reduced government regulation could lead to more harmful consequences,” said Lu Ann Williams, global insights director at Innova, in the report.

Though terms like “natural” or “clean” may suggest the absence of artificial sweeteners, additives or preservatives, they do not currently have regulated or agreed-upon definitions and cannot be relied upon to indicate whether a product contains demonized ingredients, per Innova.

• The term “ultra-processed” comes from the NOVA system, which some critics argue is vague, sometimes lumping in fortified or plant-based foods.
• Experts warn that anti-UPF efforts may overlook affordability and access, especially for lower-income communities, according to a recent study by Brightfield Group.

The trend of actively avoiding artificial colors is strongest among higher-income consumers, Gen Xers and Boomers. There has been a 58% year-over-year increase in social media discussions surrounding synthetic dyes, according to Brightfield.

• Top-growing phrases include “linked to hyperactivity” and the “clean label movement.” Consumers increasingly connect synthetic dyes and UPFs to hormone disruption, microplastic exposure and degraded soils.
• Still, only 22.9% of survey respondents reported avoiding processed foods often.

Looking ahead, Brightfield believes food dyes will be the next frontier of transparency. It expects to see dye-free snack aisles (chips, crackers, cereals), reformulated kids’ products in school lunches and certified “Made Without Synthetic Dyes” shelf tags.

• Replacements Brightfield is tracking include beetroot and black carrot extracts (reds/purples), lycopene from tomatoes (reds) and spirulina, blue matcha and butterfly pea flower (blues).