Adapting to Food Additive Challenges

A rapidly changing regulatory landscape influenced by politics, social movements, and misinformation is magnifying the usual challenges posed by food industry additive rules, experts assessing the situation told a crowd at IFT FIRST^®: Annual Event and Expo on Monday.

The keynote panel, “Food Additives: Reformulation and Regulatory Challenges,” moderated by Lynn Warner, head, North America Regulatory at Givaudan Flavors, featured panelists Martin J. Hahn, partner at Hogan Lovells US; David Schoneker, president, owner, and consultant at Black Diamond Regulatory Consulting; Lisa Navarro, a toxicologist and principal at Ramboll; and Jensen Jose, regulatory counsel at The Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Consumer demand for natural, clean label ingredients continues to grow, and so the food industry must meet consumers where they are and address their concerns, even when the ingredients they are shunning have been proven to be safe, Warner concluded.

In addition, the food industry must confront the "hard truths of reformulation and regulatory challenges" that are now occurring, and the attendant cost, sourcing, technical, and scalability challenges they bring, she added.

Further, the rise of the MAHA movement (Make America Healthy Again), spawned by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (backed by the MAHA Political Action Committee established by his senior staffers), has influenced states such as Texas and Louisiana to pass new laws banning the use of many food additives and colorings, panelists reported.

"It's very challenging when decisions are being made by tweet. The old laws don't apply anymore," said Hahn, criticizing what he termed administrative chaos in Washington, D.C.

Of particular concern, Hahn said, are a patchwork of new state laws, particularly in Texas and Louisiana, that ban some food and beverage ingredients, including colorings, and put food companies at risk of running afoul of them if they are not careful.

"I would encourage everyone to look at all the state laws,” Hahn said. “Do we have consistency? No. [The new laws] are subject to [court] challenges ... but they are [banning] the ingredients du jour that MAHA has decided they don't like. You can anticipate more regulations. These are very challenging times ... stay tuned."

Historically, the food industry has been litigation averse, Hahn observed. But "we have to view [these developments] as a crisis,” he continued. “If we don't take action, we are going to incentivize [more] state legislatures to pass similar bills.”

Jensen, who is with a watchdog group representing consumers, advocates for Congress to give the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) more authority and funding so that it can assure the public that the food additives and ingredients it reviews and approves are safe. A state-by-state system of banning different chemicals is not workable, sustainable, or practical, he declares.

"Consumers believe what they hear online, and what they hear from politicians, but facts matter. Good science matters. We've got to find a way to get the people to look at [science-based fact]," said Schoneker.

“Misinformation is so prevalent ... from the MAHA moms, RFK, online. Now consumers have concerns where there are no facts supporting [those] concerns. Unfortunately, many flawed studies are being highlighted. Even studies the FDA found to be flawed are being flogged as the truth. There's a lot of misinformation out there," Schoneker added.

"Consumer perception is as close to regulation as you can get," Navarro observed. "Consumers drive what we do. We in the food industry try to figure out what our consumers want ... and navigate to that. I see this as an opportunity, really. There are amazing things going on in the food industry and with food science. We can solve these problems."ft