A class action suit has been filed in New Jersey against Snapple, charging that the use of high-fructose corn syrup makes their claim of "all natural" false advertising. Deceptive advetising claims are everywhere these days-- perhaps the only thing more ubiquitous is high fructose corn syrup-- and I'm all for cracking the whip on corporations who engage in such practices. But only if the advertising in question is, um, false.
I wouldn't bat an eyelash at the appointment of a High-Fructose Corn Syrup Czar to head the War on Sugar. Grab a package of something from your fridge and check the label-- it's probably there. And we wonder why obesity is rampant in America. But as evil as high-fructose corn syrup is, to call it unnatural seems absurd. According to the article:
High-fructose corn syrup is made from corn starch that is processed with enzymes to create glucose and fructose. Critics of the sweetener charge it is far from natural because of the multi-step process required to create it.
Corn starch and enzymes. No chemicals, nothing unnatural. Critics are trying to attach guilt by association. The process used to create the syrup requires multiple steps, therefore the result is unnatural. And there is certainly a definition of "unnatural" that would support this. Could the syrup be created spontaneously in nature? If not, by one definition, it's unnatural. But I don't think that's the definition consumers would find most useful in this context. What we really want to know is whether or not there are chemical additives in our food. I don't care if bananas and kiwis grow in entirely different climates, such that they could never be in the same place "naturally". If you puree them with some ice, the resulting smoothie is still all-natural. Hell, if you liquified them and then whipped them into a stable foam (assuming such a thing were possible)-- a configuration nature probably never intended-- there's nothing culinarily "unnatural" about it. If you made a popsicle out of it by freezing it to absolute zero-- a condition impossible in nature and enabled only by modern technology-- is there anything in the final product that my body would find unnatural? If not, what's the hubbub?
The FDA has no official definition of "natural", so the use of the term remains unregulated. High fructose corn syrup is evil, sure. But it isn't unnatural.
If lawyers are really looking for someone to go after for false advertising, I have just five words for them. Fox News: Fair and Balanced.