Consumers are easily drawn to self-promotional claims on food packaging. How should we interpret these enticing statements in advertisements and packaging? Here, we dissect some representative claims to uncover their hidden meanings and the truth behind the products.
Claim 1: "Preservative-Free"
Preservative-free doesn't mean free of other food additives. Antioxidants, flavorings, colorings, coloring agents, flavor enhancers, and similar substances may still be present. In other words, the absence of preservatives doesn't guarantee a "purely natural" state.
Many foods naturally require no preservatives—like canned goods, highly salted or sugary items, and extremely dry foods such as instant noodles or dried noodles. Canned foods eliminate bacteria and spores through sterilization and sealing, preventing external contamination. Without water, bacteria cannot multiply, while high salt and sugar levels act as natural preservatives.
However, excessively high salt and sugar content can be worse than preservatives. The health risks from excessive salt far outweigh those from trace preservatives. For instance, sauces, pastes, and pickles claiming "no preservatives" are often extremely salty, sometimes even sweetened to mask the saltiness. Thus, "preservative-free" should not be the primary reason consumers prioritize purchasing a product.
Claim 2: "No Artificial Colors"
This implies the product still contains colorants, but they are not synthetic—instead, they are extracted from natural raw materials. Examples include carotenoid extracts, monascus pigment, and lac red, all derived from natural foods.
For most consumers, natural colorants seem more reassuring. However, the extraction process may leave trace residues of organic solvents.As long as they meet relevant product standards, this shouldn't be a concern. The issue arises because the product's intense color comes from the pigments, implying the ingredients aren't truly "all-natural."
Take, for instance, those red or green "fruit juice" products commonly found in supermarkets. They appear to be concentrated fruit extracts, often featuring large fruit illustrations on the packaging. Yet, a closer look at the ingredient list reveals they contain only about 20% real fruit juice.This implies that 80% of the contents are a mixture of water, sugar, flavorings, colorants, thickeners, and other additives. Even though natural colorants are used, this misleads consumers into believing the product is more concentrated than 100% juice.
Claim 3: "No added sugar"
This claim frequently appears on products like starch-based snacks, cookies, and pastries. Their packaging states "no added sugar," meaning they contain no table sugar. Middle-aged and elderly individuals, diabetics, and those watching their weight are particularly drawn to this claim. In reality, this is a significant trap.
Sucrose isn't the only ingredient that rapidly spikes blood sugar. Refined starches already cause significant glycemic surges, and starch-derived products like dextrin, maltodextrin, malt syrup, glucose syrup, and high-fructose corn syrup are even worse offenders. These ingredients frequently appear in "sucrose-free" products.For diabetics, choosing these alternatives is worse than eating plain rice.
Nutritionally speaking, "no added sugar" doesn't mean higher nutrient content. If sugar isn't added, what fills the volume? It's typically starch, dextrin, fats, and oils—offering little benefit beyond providing calories and raising blood sugar.The problem is, these products often create a misleading impression of being "premium" or "nutritious."
Claim 4: "MSG-Free"
Western products frequently tout "MSG-free" claims, as if MSG were a dangerous toxin. However, a small number of people are indeed sensitive to monosodium glutamate (MSG) and may experience adverse reactions.Thus, numerous so-called MSG-free products have emerged. Yet many experts caution that "no MSG" does not equate to the absence of monosodium glutamate itself, nor does it guarantee the absence of artificial flavor enhancers.