The federal government has announced two plans regarding the safety of foods. The plans address the so-called GRAS loophole and the definition of ultra-processed foods.
In the announcement from the Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said by proposing a definition for ultra-processed foods the government is addressing the nation’s “chronic disease epidemic.”
“Nearly 60 percent of the American diet is made up of ultra-processed foods, and childhood obesity now affects more than one in five American children,” Kennedy said.
The proposed definition has not yet been published. It remains at the Office of Management and Budget with no timetable for release.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is joining the health department in promoting the definition of ultra-processed foods.
“The proposed definition incorporates feedback from thousands of stakeholders, including industry, consumer organizations, researchers, and members of the public,” according to the statement.
USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins said the move to define ultra-processed foods “has brought renewed attention to the food all Americans have been eating, and this action will bring greater transparency for consumers choosing their ingredients.”
Generally recognized as safe (GRAS) loophole
Also announced was new federal oversight of food additives known as generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Kennedy has promised to close the so-called GRAS loophole whereby food companies self-regulate their determination of and use of GRAS substances.
Although Kennedy’s announcement says the health department has proposed a rule to address the safety of GRAS substances, he also said the rule does not require companies to submit to government testing of such food additives.
Rather, the proposed rule would require “manufacturers to notify the U.S. Food and Drug Administration when concluding that the use of a substance added to human or animal food is Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS).”
The rule would not require companies to submit to government review, but only provide the government with information regarding GRAS substances. The current system has been in place since 1958.
“The proposal would modernize the GRAS framework, increase transparency, and give the FDA greater visibility into substances entering the food supply,” according to the health department’s announcement.
“The proposed rule would modernize that framework by making GRAS notifications mandatory.”
Currently companies themselves are allowed to determine whether substances are safe. That would not change under the proposed rule. Acting FDA Commissioner Kyle Diamantes said the rule would “subject (companies) to transparent, science-based oversight.”
Consumer advocacy groups react
Several consumer groups have responded to the health department’s announcement regarding GRAS substances.
Brian Ronholm, director of food policy at Consumer Reports, said in addition to lacking teeth, the proposed rule could take years to implement, saying that states should not be barred from pursuing their own laws.
“Considering the out-of-control, self-regulatory system we currently have for food ingredients, it’s disappointing that today’s announcement lacks substance and doesn’t propose anything meaningful. Given the lack of any real enforcement under the proposed rule for failing to submit a GRAS notice, combined with the fact that it would not apply to chemicals already in our foods, it risks maintaining the status quo that allows secret ingredients and chemicals to remain on the market without FDA review,” Ronholm said.
Food & Water Watch also released a statement questioning the efficacy of the proposed GRAS rule. The group said the proposed rule would not stop those chemicals from entering the food supply.
“While today’s proposed rule is a baby step toward safer food, it falls short of the true reform needed to keep dangerous chemicals out of the food supply. For decades, corporations have exploited the GRAS loophole to self-police which chemicals make it into the food we eat. We need stronger regulation to close the loophole once and for all, and we need to invest in the agencies charged with ensuring food safety,” said Food & Water Watch.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest expressed a similar view on the GRAS proposal and also said Kennedy’s proposal about defining ultra-processed foods falls short.
“Both aim to address the harms of certain processed foods, a key problem in public health,” said CSPI President Dr. Peter G. Lurie “One of the actions announced today (GRAS) is only a proposal and the other (the UPF definition) is not even that; eventually both will require further action to finalize and implement. Today’s celebration also serves to distract from the real harm this administration has already carried out on independent science and healthy food access.
“The GRAS loophole in our current food additive regulatory system allows companies to self-certify the safety of new food chemical uses in secret, . . . For too long, FDA has been blind to the full universe of novel chemicals used in our foods and industry has aggressively lobbied against attempts at federal reform. We can be sure that industry will pull out all the stops to promote its interests as the rule is finalized.
“. . . The proposed rule will still allow companies to sell products before or during the process of submitting a GRAS notice to FDA—there’s no requirement for companies to get the greenlight from FDA before going to market, which is one of the fundamental flaws in the existing system.”
