The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) says that a claim made in a marketing email from CLF Distribution that a jam product was ‘naturally sweet’ was misleading, and should not repeated. 

The ruling by the ASA is the latest by the watchdog to scrutinise terms and phrases commonly used by the natural products industry to differentiate itself from mainstream for products. In this case, the ASA’s ruling hinged on its interpretation of the extent of processing of two sweetening ingredients.

The ASA says it was responding to a complainant who had challenged whether a description of four jam products – “These jams are crafted with high-quality, naturally sweet ingredients that deliver all the fruity flavour and richness of traditional jams without the sugar spike” – was misleading because the products contained erythritol and steviol glycosides.

The ASA contacted CLF about the complaint, but says the company did not respond. 

After assessing the claim, the ASA concluded that “traders would understand the term ‘naturally sweet ingredients’ to mean the sweetening ingredients in the product were completely natural”. The watchdog said it understood that traders would understand that some level of processing would be required but that “ingredients which underwent more than minimal processing were unlikely to be understood as completely natural”.

The watchdog said it understood that traders would understand that some level of processing would be required but that “ingredients which underwent more than minimal processing were unlikely to be understood as completely natural”

Commenting further on the specific ingredients in question, the ASA said: “The jams promoted in the ad included the sweetener erythritol, a sugar alcohol. We understood that in commercial production, erythritol was manufactured through a corn fermentation process, rather than having been directly isolated or extracted from a plant. We further understood that the purification of erythritol typically involved an ion exchange. We considered those types of processing would not be understood by traders to be in line with their expectations of a sweetener described as a “naturally sweet ingredient”.

”The jams also included steviol glycosides. We acknowledged that this sweetener was derived from a natural source, the stevia plant. However, we understood that to isolate steviol glycosides from the stevia plant, manufacturers used multiple chemical processes including extraction with solvents, filtration, ion exchange and crystallisation. We considered those types of processing were unlikely to be in line with traders’ expectations of a sweetener described as a “naturally sweet ingredient”.”

On this basis, the ASA said, the claim “naturally sweet ingredients” was not substantiated and the ad was therefore misleading. The regulator told CLF not to repeat the ad in its present form.

Image: ASA ruling says sweeteners derived from natural sources, such as stevia, should not be described as ‘natural’ if they have been more than minimally processed