Growing up in a tamil household, my concept of food and health was heavily influenced by traditional practices but also the growing influence of healthy food trends. I can remember a time when coconut oil, a stable in tamil and keralite diet was vilified, bread was considered healthier than whole wheat roti (flat bread) and rice and all fat was considered unhealthy. People ditched sattu and kanji was abandoned for cereal, indigenous millets ditched for chia and quinoa and avocado toast. I remember reading about quinoa being a superfood and replacing rice with it, though it was extremely expensive at the time. These trends highlight an interesting pattern in consumer behavior, where there is an essential devaluaing of traditional foods and produce for “exotic” food trends or endorsements by health gurus. 

Super Foods: Nutritional view 

Superfoods (grains, fruits etc)  usual refer to food that is considered healthy with high levels of either nutrients or bioactive phytochemicals with human health benefits or simply put food that has ecveptional nutritional properties. As of 2024 there are 136 foods that are designated as superfoods. Multiple companies market their products as being “superfoods” but the issue arises from the lack of regulatory clarity on what exactly falls under this definition. Essentially the question then becomes what exactly falls under the scope of superfood? Unfortunately, this regulatory gap creates a situation that is highly ambigious and has led the EU to to ban the word superfood from being used on packaging and formal marketing of any product unless there is scientific evidence for the claim. However, despite certain regulatory positions, informal communication channels and media continue to use this label. 

Why is this a problem? 

Super foods are actually healthy with high nutritional value and in appropriate quantities can provide a wide range of nutrients, vitamins , minerals, fiber and antioxidants in one serving. They might also prevent diseases. The issue isn’t always in the classficiation of certain food as superfood instead it is in elevating certain food to the status of being the “be all and end all” of a healthy diet. Research suggests almost all food that are minimally processed have superfood qualities and form the base of a healthy diet. Therefore, the real value lies in understanding the concepts of a balanced diet, recognizing the need to limit consumption of processed food products and ensuring a balanced but diverse diet that suits the nutritional and health needs of an individual or in some cases community. 

Marketing Strategy 

The main consumer base for superfoods continues to be people living in the West and mostly a luxury of the privileged as healthy food is usually expensive and unaccessible to those in lower socio-economic situations. Consumer trends show that health claims sell and naturally this is exploited or capitalized by food producers to increase their sales. There are arguments made to suggest that food producers fund research studies to support particular health claims about their food products and thereby contriving food and nutrition science into supporting their marketing goals. An article for the Atlantic by Marion Netlse makes this argument by using the examples of Royal Hawaiian Macadamia Nut and Wild Blueberries of North America where research produced claims such as “eating macadamia nuts every day could reduce the risk of heart disease” and “Wild Bluberries’ particular frozen blueberries are healthier than fresh blueberries”. The term “superfood” often is advertised as a cure all regardless of what comprises the rest of a person’s diet. The labelling of black berries as a superfood increased the sales dobled between 2005 and 2007. 

It is noticed that the success of marketing strategies often lies in the origin story of the food. Food products that are branded as coming from exotic, secretive or obscure communities then to hold more weight than a mainstream food. Claiming that a food product comes from mystical or indigenous origins contributes to the legitimacy of health claims and superiority of these food products. For examples, Acai is marketed to have saved people in the Amazon from starvation and provided abundance to those who live there and still continues to do so. In the case of Acai, there are claims about its anti-aging properties due to the presence of certain bioactive molecules (phytochemicals) which is the firm base that supports its designation as a super food. However, research has shown that other fruits have these phytochemicals in comparable levels in grapes, strawberries, peaches, blueberries, pomegranates, apples and others. Similarly Acai’s claimed concentration of antioxidants cannot be fully absorbed by the body making many health claims subjective and half truths. 

Impact on Economy, Communities and Environment

It is evident that the concept of superfoods is a double-edged sword—a blend of genuine nutritional potential and a marketing frenzy designed to capitalize on health-conscious consumers. At its heart, health sells, but the real cost often goes unnoticed: the erosion of traditional diets, the marginalization of local communities, and the strain on fragile ecosystems. The key lies not in blindly idolizing superfoods but in fostering a more nuanced understanding of nutrition—one that respects the value of balanced diets, champions sustainability, and prioritizes the well-being of both people and the planet. After all, what good is a “superfood” if there’s no fertile land left to grow it on?

References

The science of superfoods: Really beneficial, or just marketing?. Read more here. 

The Murky Marketing of Superfoods—The Case of Açaí. Read more here.

Rich People’s Food? Changing Food Landscapes and the Need for a Critical Discourse on Superfoods. Read more here 

The Sustainability of Superfoods: The Case of Quinoa. Read more here.