Currently browsing posts about: Food-policy

Michael Jacobson, founder and former president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, is now promoting development of a National Food Museum.  One of its projects is keeping score on administration food policies.

He lists them as positive or negative, like this.

The most recent entry is dated June 26, a negative: the huge cut in SNAP benefits.

Alas, the negatives far outweigh the positives.  Take a look.

Thanks to Food Fix for this collection of tracking sites

• STAT News: Isabella Cueto’s report on MAHA’s minimal progress
• HHS: “MAHA in Action” public health wins (Food Fix says this is more like a campaign site).
• FDA:  Food industry pledges to remove food dyes (promises, but not much action yet)

The big news in my world last week was the leaking of drafts of the forthcoming MAHA strategy report.

At least four reporters sent me copies for comments.

• Leaked version dated August 6 (highlighted to indicate food issues)
• Leaked version dated August 11 (no highlights)

I did not do a careful comparison.  The main difference seems to be that the earlier version had this useful graphic about MAHA’s strategic intentions.

All of this may change when the final report is released, but here are my initial thoughts on its food sections.

First, the background: The first report, despite the hallucinated references, was a strong indictment of this country’s neglect of the health of our children. It stated the problems eloquently. It promised that the second report would state policies to address those problems.

As for this report: No such luck.

It states intentions, but when it comes to policy, it has one strong, overall message: more research needed.

Regulate?  Not a chance, except for the long overdue closure of the GRAS loophole (which lets corporations decide for themselves whether chemical additives are safe).

Everything else is waffle words: explore, coordinate, partner, prioritize, develop, or work toward.”

One good thing: the report mentions marketing to children, but only to “explore development of industry guidelines.”  Nothing about regulation.  This is too little too late.  We know what food marketing does to kids.  It’s way past time to stop it.

A few comments on specific issues mentioned.

• “USDA will prioritize precision nutrition research…”  USDA?  NIH is already doing that, and it is the antithesis of public health research, the kind that really will make Americans healthier.
• The report emphasizes color and other chemical additives (we knew it would), a definition (not regulation) of ultra-processed foods, and a potential front-of-pack label (unspecified).
• It says it will modernize infant formula (really? how?), and will work to increase breastfeeding (again, how?).

And then there are the contradictions:

• Improve hospital food, but the administration is taking money away from hospitals.
• Teach doctors about nutrition (how?)
• Prioritize “whole healthy foods” in nutrition assistance programs (but cut SNAP and WIC)
• Expand EFNEP (but eliminate SNAP-ED)
• Promote healthy meals in child care settings (also defunded)
• Encourage grocery stores in low-income areas (how?)

How are they going to do this?  It doesn’t say.

Are there any teeth behind it?  It doesn’t look like this is anything more than voluntary (and we know how voluntary works with the food industry; it doesn’t).  None of this says how or has any teeth behind it.

And oh no!  MAHA boxes.  I’m guessing these are like what got given out—badly—during the pandemic. 

Resources

• Politico: it published the first leak.  Its current headline: “quite industry friendly”
• Stat News (I’m quoted): This covers the entire report and emphasizes the reneging on trying to reduce pesticides in response to industry lobbying
• New York Times (I’m quoted): also a much longer story emphasizing the pesticide problem
• Washington Post: also emphasizing ag issues
• CNN (I’m quoted): lots on processed foods, as well
• Civil Eats: Should Regenerative Farmers Pin Hopes on RFK Jr.’s MAHA?
• Center for Science in the Public Interest: 

It is striking that the leaked Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Strategy Report, like its AI-assisted predecessor, embodies much of the idiosyncratic beliefs about food and drugs of one person: Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. He might be right about food dyes, but the report’s recommendations to alter our vaccine framework, restructure government agencies, and promote meat and whole milk are going to promote disease, not health…

The report…seems to twist itself into knots to make it clear that it will not be infringing upon food companies….But we also need to judge the administration by what it does, not what it says. And the administration’s attacks on SNAP, Medicaid, the health insurance exchanges, and the FDA and USDA workforces are poised to make America sicker, hungrier, and more at risk from unsafe food.

• John Oliver on the MAHA movement’s lack of genuine policy initiatives (I’m quoted!)  Do not miss this one.

The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) commission was rumored to be releasing its second report, this one on policy, yesterday, but that did not happen.

CNN reported: “New ‘Make America Healthy Again’ report to be released in weeks”

The commission is “on track” to deliver its report to the White House by August 12, White House spokesman Kush Desai said in a statement. “The report will be unveiled to the public shortly thereafter as we coordinate the schedules of the President and the various cabinet members who are a part of the Commission.”

We have had plenty of hints about what it might be promoting:

• Get rid of artificial foods dyes   [ok]
• Cane sugar is better than high fructose corn syrup.  [not when it comes to sugars and calories]
• Beef tallow is better than seed oils [not when it comes to heart disease risk].
• Close the GRAS loophole (the rule that lets food companies say whether the additives they use are safe).  [good idea, about time]

According to Politico, after an

outcry from major food businesses and farm groups that are traditionally allies to Trump, the White House promised to stay away from a crackdown on pesticides and avoid surprising the food industry with new additive targets or regulations.  Industry insiders are expecting the report to…secure more voluntary commitments from companies on the transition to natural food dyes, define “ultra-processed foods,” update the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, reform the “generally recognized as safe” designation and limit recipients of federal food aid from purchasing junk food with their benefits.

I love Politico’s quote from a food industry lobbyist: “The White House has certainly gotten the message, both from agriculture and the food sector, that they are on the edge of a nanny state…Like this is Michelle Obama on steroids. The message we’ve gotten from the White House is, ‘Don’t worry, we’re not letting the crazy people run rampant over the food sector.’”

In anticipation of the report’s release, Food and Water Watch issued a statement: “Making America Healthy Will Require Big Ag Confrontation, Not Capitulation.”

The MAHA Commission’s report is a smokescreen designed to draw attention away from the Trump Administration’s dangerous deregulatory agenda. The report will be most notable in what it lacks: any real action on glyphosate, linked to rising cancer rates nationwide…Food & Water Watch research finds that Bayer has spent over $21 million on federal lobbying since the federal Cancer Gag Act…in 2023… — a 43 percent increase over the past ten quarters. State spending is also on the rise. In the past year, Bayer spent more on lobbying than any other year on record in Iowa, a key battleground state where 89% of voters oppose the Cancer Gag Act. The bill failed.

Clearly, much is at stake.  It looks like MAHA versus the realities of MAGA.

I can’t wait to see how this one resolves and hope the wait isn’t too long.  Stay tuned for this one.

Addition August 15: The New York Times seems to have gotten a leaked copy.of the report.  It has plenty to say about this early draft.

I would be remiss not to comment on congressional passage of the “Big Beautiful Bill” which takes money from the poor and gives it to the rich (see Paul Krugman’s Attack of the Sadistic Zombies).

For what all this has to do with food, take a look at Kevin Klatt’s “6 Months of MAHA: A Reflection and Call to Action.”

My summary of his summary of what MAHA and MAGA have done so far:

• Cut $1 billion from USDA for local food purchases for school lunch and food bank
• Proposed a 40% cut to the NIH budget (which pays for nutrition research)
• Made huge cuts to SNAP.
• Cut WIC fruit and vegetable benefits.
• Allowed obesity researcher Kevin Hall to resign
• Cut landmark nutrition trials such as the Diabetes Prevention Program.
• Defunded major nutrition departments, like Harvard’s.
• Cut several molecular & community nutrition grants at Cornell.
• Eliminated USAID, a major funder of global nutrition research and intervention.
• Disrupted lead exposure programs.
• Cut FDA and CDC, including the human foods program HFP and food safety lab funding and staff (some reinstated).

Klatt’s point:

At 6 months in, I think it’s time for food and nutrition advocates, scientists and professionals to call out the MAHA agenda for what it is – it’s a movement with the right vibes, the wrong priorities and solutions, headed up by someone with dangerous thoughts on public health who is not going to improve the health of Americans, nutritional or otherwise.

By wrong priorities, I’m thinking color additives (yes, let’s get rid of them, but other things matter more) and seed oils (really, they are healthier than animal fats, especially in large amounts).

There are still real questions about what MAHA will actually do.  I’m waiting for the dietary guidelines and second MAHA report.  Those should reveal the real agenda.

I was delighted to see this opinion piece in Forbes by Hank Cardello, who writes very much from the food industry’s point of view: The One Big Beautiful Bill To MAHA: Drop Dead.

The so-called “One Big Beautiful Bill” now moving through the Senate proposes sharp cuts to SNAP (food stamps), WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) and Medicaid—programs that are lifelines for low-income families. The contradiction is glaring: How can one branch of government promote healthier eating while another branch strips away the supports that make that possible?

“The bill handicaps MAHA’s goals,” he says, pointing out that reducing benefits for these programs can only “increase food insecurity, making it more difficult for people to afford nutritious food and sustain their health.”

This, he says, is

a political blunder…affordable food has more power to sway voters than tariffs or slogans. Cut these programs, and we widen the gap between what families should eat and what they can eat….Medicaid and SNAP aren’t just social programs—they’re long-term investments in public health and economic stability.

He suggests three ways to make MAHA a reality:

• Expand SNAP eligibility to include struggling working families just above the poverty line.
• Recognize food policy as a voter issue, not just a health issue.
• Lawmakers should stop pretending nutrition policy can succeed without social policy alignment.

COMMENT

Wow.  I could not have said this better myself.  What this tells me is that at least some segments of the food industry fully understand that making people too poor to buy their products is not good for business, let alone for society.  Cardullo always has intelligent things to say about food issues, even when I don’t always agree with them.  On this one, we are completely aligned.  Thanks Hank.

As a long-time proponent of food advocacy, I’ve been collecting suggestions for what you and I can do to stop or counter presidential decrees that we think damaging to Americans and American democracy.

A lot of this is easy.  Do it!

• State your opinion to Washington: Call the Capitol switchboard: (202) 224-3121.
• State your opinion to your representatives. To find your representative, click here.  To find your Senator, click here.
• Protect the vulnerable in your community; Urge your state’s attorney general to file complaints, injunctions, and restraining orders. To find your state attorney general, click here.
• Join with others in your community to protest what needs to be protested. To find local organizations working on such issues, click Indivisible here.
• Boycott companies enabling the illegal government takeover. Click here to find out a corporation’s politics.
• Support groups doing the litigating. Track federal cases here.
• Speak truth to power. Get news from reliable sources; spread it.
• Take care of yourself; stay strong.

Much of this has been inspired by Robert Reich’s daily comments on current events, and his summary of needed actions. 

He says,

We will get through this, and we will prevail.”

But it will require confidence, courage, and tenacity. We need to stay healthy for this fight. We need to be fortified by those we care about. And we need to be there for those we love.

His final piece of advice: “keep the faith.”

Do not give up on America. Do not fall into the traps of cynicism and defeatism. Remember, Trump won the popular vote by only 1.5 points. By any historical measure, this was a squeaker…America has deep problems, to be sure. Which is why we can’t give up on it — or give up the fights for social justice, equal political rights, equal opportunity, democracy, and the rule of law.

OOPS: A reader alerted me that all links have been taken down by the new administration.

In his last weeks in office, former President Biden issued a Fact Sheet on the food system investments achieved by his administration. A reader, Ethan Wolf, sent in a link from the Wayback Machine. Fact Sheet on the food system investments achieved by his administration

The Fact Sheet divides the achievements into several categories.

• Building new markets and income for farmers and ranchers
• Modernizing the middle of the agriculture and food supply chain: food processing, aggregation, and distribution
• Creating more fair and competitive markets
• Improving food access, nutrition security and health
• Enchancing food safety
• Supporting breakthrough agricultural rewearch and innovation

To highlight just one—food safety:

• USDA issued a rule to classify raw poultry products contaminated with specific Salmonella levels and serotypes as adulterated.
• USDA also finalized a rule declaring Salmonella an adulterant in raw breaded stuffed chicken products exceeding 1 colony-forming unit per gram.
• FDA launched the “Closer to Zero” initiative (C2Z), which sets forth a science-based approach to continually reducing exposure to lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury to the lowest levels possible in foods eaten by babies and young children.
• FDA has issued numerous action levels for toxic elements: draft levels for lead in juices; final levels for lead in foods intended for babies and young children; and a final level for arsenic in apple juice. 
• FDA revoked authorizations for the uses of brominated vegetable oil (BVO) in food because of the potential for adverse health effects in humans.
• FDA also revised its regulations and revoked prior-sanctioned uses of partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs) because studies consistently link consumption of PHOs (industrially produced trans fat) with heart disease. 
• Before the end of the term, FDA also plans to revoke the authorization of Red No. 3, a red dye used in certain medications and various foods and beverages, including candies, cakes, frostings, and frozen desserts, due to studies showing that the dye caused cancer [it did this].

Perhaps coincidentally, Lisa Held at Civil Eats published How Four Years of Biden Reshaped Food and Farming: From day one, the administration prioritized climate, “nutrition security,” infrastructure investments, and reducing food system consolidation. Here’s what the president and his team actually did.

Her categories are somewhat different:

• Taking on Consolidation and Corporate Power, and Supporting Farmer Livelihood
• Tackling the Climate Crisis
• Regulating Pesticides and Other Chemicals
• Focusing on Food Safety
• Linking Hunger, Nutrition, and Health
• Supporting Food and Farm Workers
• Advancing Equity

Here’s my excerpted summary of her analysis of Taking on Corporate Power.

I spent a lot of time last week responding to reporters’ questions about Trump’s appointing Robert F. Kennedy, Jr to head the Department of Health and Human Services.

Here’s what the president-elect said about the appointment on Twitter (X):

For too long, Americans have been crushed by the industrial food complex and drug companies who have engaged in deception, misinformation, and disinformation when it comes to Public Health…HHS will play a big role in helping ensure that everybody will be protected from harmful chemicals, pollutants, pesticides, pharmaceutical products, and food additives that have contributed to the overwhelming Health Crisis in this Country. Mr. Kennedy will restore these Agencies to the traditions of Gold Standard Scientific Research, and beacons of Transparency, to end the Chronic Disease epidemic, and to Make America Great and Healthy Again!

Trump has instructed Mr. Kennedy to end chronic disease and “Go wild on food.”

In various statements, Mr. Kennedy has said he wants to get rid of “poisons”

• Ultra-processed foods in schools
• Artificial colors in cereals
• Chemicals, pollutants, pesticides
• Mercury in fish
• Fast food

He also wants to

• Restrict sodas on SNAP
• Promote sustainable, regenerative farming by small farmers
• End conflicts of interest between government agencies and corporations: Corporate capture is the biggest threat to democracy.

These are the kinds of things I’ve been saying and writing about for decades!

[He also is pushing for some things that are much less well grounded in science: getting rid of grains for kids, seed oils, and fluoride in drinking water; deregulating raw milk; and firing all nutrition scientists on day 1].

If he really does do what he’s promising here, it means taking on the food industry, in a way that no government has ever done, and Trump showed no signs of doing in his first term.

What can we expect?  I have no idea, but thist sure will be interesting to watch.

Mother Jones calls Kennedy’s appointment “a genuine catastrophe.”

For charges of hypocrisy, click here.

Civil Eats asked a bunch of people to predict “The Path Forward for Food and Ag.”  Here’s what I said.

I wish I had a crystal ball to say how food and agriculture issues would play out over the next four years, but all I have to go on is what Trump and his followers say. If we take them at their word, then we must expect them to implement their Project 2025 plan, which replaces one deep state with another that favors conservative business interests and ideology. This calls for replacing staff in federal agencies with Trump loyalists and dismantling them, stopping the USDA from doing anything to prevent climate change, reforming farm subsidies (unclear how), splitting the farm bill to deal separately with agricultural supports and SNAP, reducing SNAP participation by reinstating work requirements and reducing the Thrifty Food Plan, and making it more difficult for kids to participate in school meals.

On the other hand, some of the plans make sense: eliminating checkoff programs and repealing the sugar program, for example. So do some of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s goals: Make America Healthy Again by focusing on chronic disease prevention, getting harmful chemicals out of kids’ foods, and getting rid of conflicts of interest among researchers and agency staff. It’s too early to know how much of this is just talk, but I’m planning to do what I can to oppose measures I view as harmful, but to strongly support the ones I think will be good for public health.