🎉 NEW soft, tangy, delicious corn & soy free goat chevre! BUY CHEVRE.

"Natural Flavors". So mysterious. Do you know exactly what they’re made of?

written by

Marie Reedell

posted on

February 18, 2022

“Natural flavors” is a mysterious ingredient in so many foods. What exactly are “natural flavors”? This is a question that’s irked me for years. And, Google (and food producers too) have been little help finding a real answer. 

I like to know everything about where my food comes from and how it’s produced. Knowing the answer to this question is imperative for me to make an educated choice. Without an answer… well, I’ll just avoid that ingredient as much as I can.

Finally, I met a food scientist who knows the answer and could scientifically explain it to me. There are still some unknowns, but I do feel I have a much better grasp on this than ever before. 

Let’s get to it…

“Natural flavors” are compounds produced in a lab that have the exact same structure as a specific flavor compound found in real food.

The idea is that the taste of a fresh strawberry can be recreated. If not for “natural flavors”, strawberry-flavored products would have a jammy, cooked strawberry taste rather than a fresh strawberry taste.

According to market research and blind taste tests, it seems that the grand majority of people prefer a fresh strawberry taste over a cooked strawberry taste.

Sure sure sure. This is all fine and well. But, is having a fresh strawberry taste year round, in every strawberry flavored product, an over-the-top luxurious expectation? 

Maybe we’re supposed to be absolutely amazed by the taste of a fresh, absolutely ripe strawberry when they’re in season in June. You know what I mean. You bite into the juicy fruit, your eyes roll back, and you can’t stop the “mmmmmm” sound coming from your mouth. Isn’t that one of the best sensations ever?

Why do we expect or feel entitled to have that flavor all year long? We ship strawberries from halfway around the world. And, we use labs to recreate that flavor as closely as possible. Strawberries are amazing… but is it worth it?

You can’t create something out of nothing. Where do those parts of the compounds in “natural flavors” come from? 

Well, I ultimately have no idea! Really, we don’t have the right to know. It’s proprietary.

According to the FDA, “natural flavors” are created from compounds extracted from a really broad list of plant or animal sources:

  • spices
  • fruit or fruit juice
  • vegetables or vegetable juice
  • edible yeast, herbs, bark, buds, root leaves, or plant material
  • dairy products, including fermented products
  • meat, poultry, or seafood
  • eggs

This is different from “artificial flavors”, which are NOT derived from a kind of food.

The compounds are extracted by heating or roasting or with enzymes or who knows how else. In addition to the flavor compounds alone, synthetic solvents, preservatives, emulsifiers, carriers, and other additives can be added. 

For “natural flavors” that are used in “certified organic” foods, the list of additives are restricted. They must use non-petroleum-based solvents, cannot be irradiated, and cannot use flavor extracts derived from genetically engineered crops. 

Keep in mind that there are many different terms to describe these kinds of ingredients - “natural flavors”, “organic flavors”, or “organic natural flavors”

Although what “natural flavors” are is still largely a mystery. What I do know is that this ingredient is hands down a lab-produced ingredient.

Since they can be derived from a wide variety of foods, people with allergies or intolerances should probably avoid them. And, if you strive to eat as clean and naturally as possible, you should probably avoid them as well. 

None of the products at Miller’s Bio Farm contain “natural flavors”. The flavors are actually “natural” and come from real food. 

Well… this is with the exception of when our processor makes a mistake. Instead of throwing that food away, we put those products in the Oops! It doesn’t meet our standards collection, note which mistake was made, and give you a discount.

What do you value when shopping for food? Are “natural flavors” part of your diet?

Opinion

Health and Nutrition

More from the blog

Raw milk or fermented dairy and lactose intolerance. Why might it help?

I was misinformed. At some point, I read that raw milk contains lactase. As it turns out, this is not true! It is true that raw milk contains many live enzymes that are inactivated during pasteurization. But, what about lactase? I’ve heard many anecdotal stories from people who are lactose intolerant... but can handle raw milk or fermented dairy. If raw milk, yogurt, kefir, or cheese doesn’t contain lactase, then why is that?

Our bone broth tested negative-ish for heavy metals 🥳 NATURAL AND CLEAN

Over the past few months a bunch of people asked us if we tested our bone broth for toxic heavy metals. When we get the same question a lot, we of course look into it. My first question was --- Is there an issue with toxic metals in bone broth? As it turns out, yes, there "can" be an issue! Heavy metals are naturally present in our environment. We need the "good" heavy metals to thrive: iron, zinc, magnesium, copper, etc. But, we can 100% do without the toxic heavy metals: arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, etc. Too many toxic heavy metals can lead to a host of pretty awful issues: nervous system damage, cardiovascular issues, cancer, endocrine disruption, kidney damage, and so on. Our body is designed to excrete heavy metals through urine (and a little bit through sweat, hair, and breastmilk too)... but only so much. There's a limit. If you're overloaded, your body will store those heavy metals in your bones, blood, tissues, and organs. Similarly, if an animal is exposed to heavy metals via food, water, air, dust, or soil, those heavy metals accumulate in the bones. Maybe the farm's soil or air is contaminated from a nearby factory. Maybe the pipes for the water has lead solder connecting them. Maybe the feed a farm is buying was grown on contaminated soil or processed on contaminated equipment.  And, of course, a main purpose of bone broth is drawing out as much as possible from the bones. If there are heavy metals in bones, they will make their way into the broth. This is especially true when you pre-soak with apple cider vinegar and simmer for 48 hours to make it thick and gelatinous (like our broth). And that led me to my second question --- Should I be concerned about every bone broth? Where is the fear coming from? Well... it seems it might be a little political. There was a study done in the UK in 2013 that scared a lot of people. It's titled "The Risk of Lead Contamination in Bone Broth Diets". This study found high levels of lead in organic chicken bone broth, which is quite concerning. And, in fact, this one study is still cited in articles written today! Let's dig a little deeper. Let's go farther than the short abstract. Here are the broths tested in the study and their test results for lead:  (9.5 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus skin and cartilage(7.01 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus bones(2.3 parts per billion): Broth made from tap water plus meat(0.89 parts per billion): Tap water alone cooked for the same amount of time as a control. But, they only used organic chicken from one farm. And, there's zero information about that farm, their practices, the feed, and the broth recipe. Did they use vinegar or wine in the broth? Was the chicken's water contaminated with lead? What was the quality of the feed and the soil? Were the chickens raised indoors or outdoors? So many unanswered questions! All we get is that it was one "organic chicken" that created a lead issue with broth. Another curious thing is that the broth with skin and cartilage contained more lead than the broth made with just bones. Bones are where lead is stored, so why wouldn't the broth made with bones only contain more lead? It's an odd result. Moreover, the abstract of the study specifically called out "bone broth diets" like GAPS and paleo. They even go so far as to write, "In view of the dangers of lead consumption to the human body, we recommend that doctors and nutritionists take the risk of lead contamination into consideration when advising patients about bone broth diets." That's quite curious. Why are they worried about these diets? Are the researchers anti healing through food? Who funded the research? Is it political? My opinion? This study is not comprehensive. It does not speak to all bone broths. But it does cover a potential issue if the water or animals are overloaded with heavy metals. What I glean from this study is that we need more research. We don't need fear to spread and people to stop drinking broth from this one study. Regardless of whether the fear was fabricated or legit, we tested our bone broth anyway. After all, it's always nice to validate that your food choices are as clean as you think. For Miller's, here were my concerns before testing: What if there's mercury in the fishmeal in our chicken feed?What if the soil that our animals live on is contaminated?What is the well water that the broth is made with is contaminated?What if the Celtic sea salt has lots of heavy metals? We got the test results back. I was super excited. But, I was also confused. At face value, it appeared that our bone broth tested NEGATIVE for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. You can find the test results right here! You'll notice that, for every sample, the results are "<0.01 mg/kg" and "<0.02 mg/kg".  I asked the lab what the "<" means. They said that it indicates their limit of quantitation (LOQ), the lowest concentration that can be accurately tested using the test procedure in that sample type. So the results simply report that none of the metals tested were found in the sample above the specific reporting LOQs. Whether or not they were present below this LOQ is information that is not provided by the test. When talking to the lab, I told them what we needed and assumed that this test would go below a 1 ppb. So, when the results came in, I assumed that a "mg/kg" was the same as a part per billion (ppb). Ummm... that math wasn't write! A "mg/kg" is actually a part per million (ppm). That means that the test we ran had results saying that the broth had less than 0.02 ppm (or 20 ppb) of arsenic and lead. And, it had less than 0.01 ppm (or 10 ppb) of cadmium and mercury. For some reference, the EPA says that less than 15 ppb of lead is safe in drinking water. Not saying that I agree, but it's a good reference point.  These results are good. It means the broth definitely isn't overloaded with toxic heavy metals. But, it's not good enough!!! We need to test again! We really need to a lower LOQ. We need to know the results with an accuracy of as low as 1 ppb. It looks like the lab we sent the original samples to doesn't have an LOQ that low. So here I am on the hunt for a lab to do it again. As soon as I can, I'll send samples in again and paying for more expensive testing to get the info you deserve. Stay tuned! I hope to have the new results in by the end of April 2025. Do you worry about toxic metals (or other junk) in your food? Where have your fears stemmed from? I'd love to hear from you. You can comment below (no account required) or contact us 😊 ----- Sources The risk of lead contamination in bone broth dietsBone Broth and Lead Toxicity: Should You Be Concerned?Bone Broth and Lead Contamination: A Very Flawed Study in Medical HypothesesBone Broth, Collagen, and Toxic Metals: A Research Review