Lots of food and drink products have slogans on them like this. “Made with pure X.” “With 100% pure Y.”
What on Earth is that supposed to mean? Does it have any legal basis or is it just pure marketing BS? It certainly doesn’t mean that the product is 100% pure whatever, simply that some unspecified amount of it was added some time in its manufacture.
I mean, I could take a gallon of warm camel piss, add a cup of 100% pure fruit juice and whack that slogan on the product, because after all it was “made with” pure juice.
Apologies to Sunny Delight if I’ve given away any secret recipe info there, BTW.
I think you’re missing the point. The critical word is “with”. His point is that the exact same item could be marked either “contains 10% fruit juice” or “made with 100% fruit juice”.
I understand the phrase “contains 10% fruit juice” to mean, “looking at the entire recipe, 10% of it is fruit juice”. In contrast, “made with 100% fruit juice” means “ignoring the rest of the recipe, one particular ingredient is totally pure fruit juice”.
Definitely a marketing thing. But I can WAG a distinction:
If a factory takes deliveries of fruit juice then that juice might well have a preservative added to ensure it keeps ok during transport. So…they can’t use the claim.
But if the concentrate is made on site, then there may be no preservatives involved until the final concoction has been put together.
But really it’s just intended to mislead.
(Like a cheesy pasta meal I saw the other day with surprisingly low calories per serving…then I saw the serving size was a spoonful :mad:)
According to the wikipedia article, In the U.S. and U.K. the product must be 100% to use the words “fruit juice”. The juice may be from a juice concentrate and reconstituted with water though. This may still be considered 100% juice.
The word nectar is used for concentrations of less then 100%.
One trick the formulators do is to use pear juice – while I don’t know if it saves on money, pear juice is a “neutral” juice that adds a lot of sweetness and less flavor than whatever it is being mixed with. So two formulae can both be “100% juice from concentrate” and the one with pear juice will taste sweeter and blander. Plus possibly it might be cheaper but I’m not sure.
I thought one ingredient of the purple drink was cyanide?
Yes, they say “drink” or “nectar” or some such advertising babble if the product is not 100% fruit juice. Some fruits don’t make (useable) juice, and have to be fruit nectar. IIRC the ingredients are in order of quantity, so if fruit juice is 4th or 5th you know there’s not a lot. If salt or seasoning is ahead of some ingredient, for example, how big a pinch is in there?
You’re right, it’s just market hype and a way to make you think it’s healthier than it is. I’ve always wondered how Sunny D gets way with that crap; I thought in Canada it was illegal to make and sell vitamin enriched fast food; selling a chocolate bar “enriched with Vitamins A and K” is not allowed because slower-thinking consumers might think they are geting a real and healthy snack when all they are getting is a slop of sugar and fat with a tiny bit of vitamin pill. So how does Sunny D get to market sugar-water as a vitamin-enriched wholesome food?
Missed the edit, but now I come to think of it, perhaps the cola example is meant to indicate that, of the water used in the cola, 100% of it is natural mineral water. But it could just as well mean that it uses a small amount of mineral water, which is 100% natural, and a load of other water.
Standard-of-identity and labeling laws are different for different kinds of products, and of course in different countries. I don’t know what it might be for the soaps and aromatherapy candles that come up on the first page of that search for me. For beverages, in the United States (I know your links are for British products), the percentage declaration is the key, and “100% juice” on the label pretty much means 100% juice in the bottle, except that
This is what you get when labeling laws are composed piecemeal.
I agree that the first product linked in the thread is using “pure” in a meaningless and misleading way, and with your point about the water in the second.
The “Made with 100%” is of course marketing lingo, much like “country fresh”. Where it does, or did, come of value is that at one time, cheap “fruit drinks” were available (are they still?) that were essentially high fructose corn syrup, water, and artificial flavors ahd color. While it might be ideal to drink, or more to the point to serve one’s kids, pure undiluted orange juice, apple juice, etc., cost may be an issue, as well as serving convenience. Giving the kids something for a beverage that, even if diluted, does contain the nutrients they need from the actual juices, is a distinct improvement over the artificially-flavored empty-calories drink, even if not quite as healthy a choice as the “pure” undiluted juice, and may in fact be the better choice for financial or convenience reasons.
Looked this up years ago, I’m sure I can find a cite if necessary:
The words “100% juice” are weasel words. Most fruits are not that sweet on their own. Apple, pear, and white grape juice are extremely cheap, much cheaper than raspberry or pomegranate or whatever exotica the fruit juice companies are trying to sell. So, they cheat: they pass the cheap white grape, apple, or pear juice through a couple of ion exchange columns. The ion exchangers strip out the flavors and colors, leaving behind the sweet fructose. They trade them for H and OH ions, which combine to form water. So, what comes out the other end is basically sugar water, which they can dump into their cran-kiwi or whatever to make it taste even sweeter and still market it as “100% juice, no sugar added!”
Read labels. The presence of apple, white grape, or pear juice in your favorite juice drink may be evidence of this practice.