The latest news, trends, analysis, interviews and podcasts from the global food and beverage industry

A new report from the White House’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) commission, led by US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr, places emphasis on ultra-processed foods (UPFs) and chemical exposure as key drivers of chronic disease in American children.

The report, published last week, aims to provide a foundation for understanding what is driving the increase in childhood obesity and conditions such as diabetes and heart disease.

It identifies four key drivers: poor diet; aggregation of environmental chemicals; lack of physical activity and chronic stress; and overmedicalisation.

UPFs

With regards to dietary health, the report strongly focuses on the rise of UPFs in modern American diets.

Generally, UPFs are understood to be food products, typically pre-packaged, that have undergone various industrial manufacturing processes and often include additives designed to enhance palatability and shelf life. These foods can also often be high in sugar, salt and saturated fat while lacking essential nutrients.

The report states that while these foods have served important purposes such as enabling longer shelf life and improving convenience, their production ‘transforms the whole and healthy food produced by America’s farmers into food-like substances that have far different nutrient profiles than the original form’.

It cites research suggesting that nearly 70% of an American child’s total calorie intake now comes from UPFs, while 90% of medical costs in the US are tied to chronic health conditions, many relating to diet.

In particular, the report points to nutrient depletion, increased caloric intake and inclusion of food additives as drivers of illness due to UPF overconsumption. It highlights potential negative health outcomes linked to additives such as synthetic food dyes like Red 40, the preservatives propylparaben and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), and artificial sweeteners including aspartame, sucralose and saccharin.

Food system changes

While the report credits the role of farmers and food scientists in driving an agri-food system of ‘abundance and affordability,’ it observes a correlation between the rise of UPFs and a pattern of ‘corporatisation and consolidation’ in today’s food system. It calls for a closer examination of this pattern, stating that a small number of corporations control a large share of food production, processing, distribution and retail – with many large food companies’ ‘core products’ falling under the UPF umbrella.

It also highlights the impact of current key food industry regulations in the US, such as the Food Safety Modernization Act and the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points system, on smaller producers and farms, stating that these regulations have led to complications and increased costs for smaller farms lacking the resources to meet comprehensive protocols.

Furthermore, it points to ‘distorted’ nutrition research and marketing as a cause for concern. The report cites research showing that US government funding by the National Institute of Health (NIH) for nutrition research makes up only 4-5% of its total budget and can be subjected to influence by ‘food industry-aligned’ researchers.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans also warrant ‘serious consideration,’ according to the MAHA report. While they emphasise the importance of whole foods as well as recommending the reduction of added sugars, saturated fats and sodium, the current guidelines do not explicitly address UPFs and can be complex for the average consumer to understand, it states.

‘Well-intentioned’ government programmes such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) ‘may have drifted from their original goals,’ the report argues, pointing to data that suggests children receiving SNAP benefits are more likely to consume greater quantities of sugar-sweetened beverages and processed meats.

Chemical exposure

Aggregation of environmental chemicals is identified in the report as a key driver of chronic disease in children, with many pollutants – such as pesticides and microplastics – linked to food consumption as a pathway of exposure.

It highlighted research studies linking the herbicide glyphosate, widely used for crop protection, with possible health effects ranging from reproductive and developmental disorders to cancers, liver inflammation and metabolic disturbances.

The report acknowledges that farmers in the US rely on crop protection tools, and states that any future regulation to restrict the use of such tools should involve ‘thoughtful consideration of what is necessary for adequate protection, alternatives and cost of production’. It notes that sudden changes in agricultural practices could have an adverse impact on the domestic and global food supply, adding that the government will continue to regularly review the safety of corop protection tools.

Industry response

The report has garnered significant, widespread media attention as individuals and organisations across the food industry supply chain have reacted to some of its key focuses and claims made within the paper.

While some have praised the report, welcoming its emphasis on moving toward more whole food-based diets and tackling dietary-related drivers of poor health, critics have suggested that the report lacks proper scientific basis and acknowledgement of socioeconomic disparities.

The International Fresh Produce Association (IFPA) praised the report’s specific acknowledgement of fruits, vegetables and other speciality crops and commitment to addressing the nation’s diet-related health crisis.

In a statement, the organisation said: “With nine in ten Americans not meeting fruit and vegetable consumption targets and up to half of children under age five not consuming a vegetable daily, the Commission must focus on evidence-based interventions that will increase fruit and vegetable consumption and support policies that ensure the prosperity of US growers, who dutifully provide an abundance of fresh fruits and vegetables for Americans every day.”

Food science association the Institute of Food Technologists responded to the report: “The report spotlighted advancements that the panellists view as needed within our food system to better support children’s health, but a more holistic analysis of the extensive evidence-based scientific body of knowledge on food and public health needs to be included – an issue we hope the MAHA Commission remedies over the next 80 days as it prepares its actionable recommendations”.

It called for a “broad stakeholder coalition to drive positive changes in public health,” that involves the food science industry.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) said the organisation appreciates the report’s interest in synthetic food dyes and aspartame, noting that the concerns over UPFs may also be “well intended”.

“If [Kennedy] wants to address ultra-processed foods, proposed rules on front-of-package labeling and sodium reduction are in the Federal Register awaiting his signature (both proposals go unmentioned in this report),” said Peter G Lurie, president of CSPI.

Lurie said the report “selectively cherry-picks the literature,” recycling Kennedy’s “long-standing pet peeves, from seed oils to vaccines”.

“In many instances, even when the report has a good idea, like increasing consumption of whole, unprocessed foods, the remedies suggested are at odds with efforts of Kennedy, Trump, Musk and Republicans in Congress to decimate federal workforce and government spending,” he added.

“The administration has slashed programs to bring local food into schools, eviscerated government funding for research on nutrition and health, eliminated the office responsible for stopping lead poisoning in children and are threatening access to life-saving vaccines.”

Some farming organisations have criticised the report for potentially stirring up fear about our food system and current agricultural practices.

Zippy Duvall, president of the American Farm Bureau Federation, commented: “It is deeply troubling for the White House to endorse a report that sows seeds of doubt and fear about our food system and farming practices, then attempts to celebrate farmers and the critical role they play in producing the safest food supply in the world”.

He said that while farmers are identified as ‘critical partners’ in the report, they were “excluded from its development, despite many requests for a seat at the table”.

“The report spotlights outlier studies and presents unproven theories that feed a false narrative, and only then does it acknowledge a mountain of evidence about the safety of our food system,” he continued.

“We are carefully examining the nearly 70 pages of contradictory assertions and look forward to further discussions with administration officials. President Trump has voiced his trust in farmers many times and we urge him to ensure a transparent process going forward with farmers at the table and sound science – not emotionally charged rhetoric – guiding the conversation.”

The National Corn Growers Association said that the report disregards “a long history of EPA expert evaluations” of key pesticides used by corn growers and other farmers.

It said in a statement: “Decades of extensive research and testing show that pesticides, including atrazine and glyphosate, can be applied safely for their intended uses. If the administration’s goal is to bring more efficiency to government, then why is the secretary of Health and Human Services duplicating efforts by raising questions about pesticides that have been answered repeatedly through research and reviews by federal regulatory bodies?”

The MAHA report said that next steps to develop a comprehensive strategy for tackling childhood chronic disease are underway, with the Commission's strategy due in August 2025.