Starbucks, Panera tout improved pumpkin spice lattes

Starbucks and Panera are each hyping reformulated versions of their pumpkin spice lattes in a fight to win over fans of the drink in coming weeks.

Starbucks Corp. said Monday its version of the concoction this year will be made with real pumpkin, and without caramel colouring. 

• John Oliver takes a stand against pumpkin spice lattes
• ​Kraft Dinner's move away from artificial colours incites war of words between bloggers

Panera meanwhile, also said its pumpkin spice latte this year will be made "entirely without artificial colours, flavours, sweeteners, preservatives or high fructose corn syrup."

The chain plans to offer samples Tuesday in Seattle, where Starbucks is headquartered. The sampling will be across the street from the first Starbucks location by Pike Place market, according to a Panera representative.

Panera Bread Co. says its version of the drink also has real pumpkin and will be sold in its stores starting Sept. 9. Starbucks has not yet said when its drink will be available.

The popularity of the pumpkin spice latte at Starbucks has made it common offering on menus at other chains during the fall.

Drink criticized by controversial blogger

Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz has called the pumpkin spice latte the company's "most popular seasonal beverage ever." In late 2013, he said sales of the drink were as strong as ever "despite the proliferation of knockoffs and copycats."

The company even has a Twitter account set up for the drink, which has more than 82,000 followers.

Starbucks's formula change comes after blogger Vani Hari, also known as the Food Babe, criticized the chain last year for the drink's ingredients and its lack of transparency around the issue.

Hari, an influential but controversial figure, has also led campaigns against such perceived ills as the food dye formerly used in Kraft Dinner and an additive found in Subway sandwich bread. 

• 'Food Babe,' Dr. Oz under fire as accusations of quackery mount against nutrition gurus

Her claims, however, were described as pseudoscience in a scathing review by a chemist. In an April article from Gawker, Yvette d'Entremont, a chemist and blogger with the moniker Science Babe, called Hari's campaigns "the worst assault on science."