3 ms·

Great! How will the reductions in consumer protection, health, FDA, etc. - by this current administration impact that? https://www.food-safety.com/articles/11

by jjkaczor 10mo ago

Great! How will the reductions in consumer protection, health, FDA, etc. - by this current administration impact that? https://www.food-safety.com/articles/11004-a-2025-timeline-of-us-federal-food-safety-changes-under-the-trump-admin https://www.food-safety.com/articles/11004-a-2025-timeline-o...

CGMthrowaway 10mo ago
I see how the article is framed, but I see a lot of good things in that timeline: MAHA Commission assessing health risks from food ingredients and chemicals and developing a strategy to combat childhood chronic disease Closing the GRAS loophole Phasing out synthetic food dyes $235 million specifically aimed at improving nutrition, controlling food additives and addressing food safety $15 million specifically for modernizing infant formula oversight $7 million to support critical laboratory operations
- russdill 10mo ago
  Anything with money amounts, my next question is how much money were we previously spending on that thing.
  - websiteapi 10mo ago
    If simply spending money worked USA would be the most healthy.
    - russdill 10mo ago
      Look, we could spend a fraction of what we do, but then there would be people who get things for free or even fraudulently. You can see just how bad that would be from an American mindset.
  - CGMthrowaway 10mo ago
    Roughly $20-30 million/year specifically aimed at nutrition, additives and diet-related food safety. So this is a 8-10x increase.
    - russdill 10mo ago
      I'm not seeing numbers supporting that https://www.fda.gov/media/166050/download https://www.fda.gov/media/166050/download
- Forgeties79 10mo ago
  > $235 million specifically aimed at improving nutrition, controlling food additives and addressing food safety Musk’s disastrous months with the admin defunded and ended a program bringing local farmers’ produce et al to public schools around my state so I’m a little bitter seeing this one.
  - hn_acc1 10mo ago
    Even then, 95% of it is probably already earmarked / targeted for some friend's grift.
    - Forgeties79 10mo ago
      Without a doubt
- derbOac 10mo ago
  What they see as necessary to combat childhood chronic disease is not necessarily what most scientists would say is necessary to combat childhood chronic disease, and might even be detrimental. Also if the new dietary recommendations are any clue, what they see as "improving nutrition" might be questionable. The devil is in the details.
deleted 10mo ago
[deleted]
fluidcruft 10mo ago
You asking how reductions in protections related to processed food (that already allow ultra processed foods) will affect safety when the new advice is to eat "real food" and seems to emphasize items that are pretty easy to confirm visually? (I mean besides the fact that the FDA came into existence due to things like selling watered down white paint as "milk")

CGMthrowaway 10mo ago

I see how the article is framed, but I see a lot of good things in that timeline: MAHA Commission assessing health risks from food ingredients and chemicals and developing a strategy to combat childhood chronic disease Closing the GRAS loophole Phasing out synthetic food dyes $235 million specifically aimed at improving nutrition, controlling food additives and addressing food safety $15 million specifically for modernizing infant formula oversight $7 million to support critical laboratory operations

russdill 10mo ago
Anything with money amounts, my next question is how much money were we previously spending on that thing.
- websiteapi 10mo ago
  If simply spending money worked USA would be the most healthy.
  - russdill 10mo ago
    Look, we could spend a fraction of what we do, but then there would be people who get things for free or even fraudulently. You can see just how bad that would be from an American mindset.
- CGMthrowaway 10mo ago
  Roughly $20-30 million/year specifically aimed at nutrition, additives and diet-related food safety. So this is a 8-10x increase.
  - russdill 10mo ago
    I'm not seeing numbers supporting that https://www.fda.gov/media/166050/download https://www.fda.gov/media/166050/download
Forgeties79 10mo ago
> $235 million specifically aimed at improving nutrition, controlling food additives and addressing food safety Musk’s disastrous months with the admin defunded and ended a program bringing local farmers’ produce et al to public schools around my state so I’m a little bitter seeing this one.
- hn_acc1 10mo ago
  Even then, 95% of it is probably already earmarked / targeted for some friend's grift.
  - Forgeties79 10mo ago
    Without a doubt
derbOac 10mo ago
What they see as necessary to combat childhood chronic disease is not necessarily what most scientists would say is necessary to combat childhood chronic disease, and might even be detrimental. Also if the new dietary recommendations are any clue, what they see as "improving nutrition" might be questionable. The devil is in the details.

deleted 10mo ago

[deleted]

fluidcruft 10mo ago

You asking how reductions in protections related to processed food (that already allow ultra processed foods) will affect safety when the new advice is to eat "real food" and seems to emphasize items that are pretty easy to confirm visually? (I mean besides the fact that the FDA came into existence due to things like selling watered down white paint as "milk")