I don't know - the term "natural" is susceptible to a lot of different meanings in this context. If the FDA is going to officially define it in a given way, then anyone who produces a product that meets that definition is naturally (ahem) going to slap it on their product. What the authors of that article want is for "natural" in that context to mean specifically and only "naturally raised," ie, free range - and most people know to look for "free range" when they want "naturally raised." To me, when I hear "natural" in that context, my understanding is simply that the meat isn't filled with chemical preservatives. There's not any real reason to expect the term to take on only it's most narrow possible meaning, either in a free market or otherwise.