A Bittersweet Deal for Consumers: The Unnatural Application of Preemption to High Fructose Corn Syrup Labeling Claims
Food and Drug Administration (FDA), labeling, regulation, authority, litigation, preemption doctrine, implied field preemption, savings clause, artificial flavoring, federal law, states rights
The recent rise of consumer consciousness regarding the health qualities of foods and beverages has become something akin to common knowledge. Reflecting this rise, studies reveal that labels regarding the health qualities of a food are more likely to increase sales. And among the health labels consumers prefer, labels describing the product as natural top the list. One website reports that according to a recent study, 31.3-percent of respondents thought that "100% natural" was the best description to read on a label, compared with only 14.2-percent who thought that "100% organic" was the best description. "All natural ingredients" was the second most preferred description; it was preferred by 25.4-percent of respondents. Because it is such a powerful phrase in labeling, how the term "natural" should be used is a hotly contested issue.
Ashley, J. (2021). A Bittersweet Deal for Consumers: The Unnatural Application of Preemption to High Fructose Corn Syrup Labeling Claims. Journal of Food Law & Policy, 6(2). Retrieved from https://scholarworks.uark.edu/jflp/vol6/iss2/6
Administrative Law Commons, Agency Commons, Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Consumer Protection Law Commons, Food and Drug Law Commons, Jurisprudence Commons, Law and Economics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Legislation Commons, Litigation Commons, Marketing Law Commons, Public Law and Legal Theory Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons