MAHA Report Leak: Food Policy Experts Raise Concerns Over Vague, Voluntary Guidelines

In May, RFK Jr.’s MAHA Commission released a report criticizing the way American society treats its children. Nutrition expert Prof. Marion Nestle called it a powerful critique. However, a recent draft of the follow-up report, meant to provide concrete solutions, left many disappointed.

This leaked draft, which the White House advised should be taken as speculative, outlines several previous plans without offering new legislative proposals. Key points include a review of the Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) process, defining ultra-processed foods, and a drive to improve labeling and guidelines concerning sugar intake. One notable change is the suggestion to lift restrictions on full-fat dairy in schools and federal nutrition programs.

Interestingly, while some industry groups feared stricter regulations on pesticides, the report chose to collaborate with industries on confidence in pesticide reviews instead.

Nestle expressed her disappointment in the draft, stating it lacked actionable plans. She hoped for significant changes but found many proposals vague. For instance, while it suggests getting color additives out of cereals, these adjustments feel minor compared to the broader health issues for American kids.

She pointed out the contradictions in the report, like pushing for better hospital food while funding cuts to hospitals are occurring. This kind of mixed messaging questioning the commitment to real change has left some health advocates frustrated. The Friends of the Earth organization emphasized that the MAHA goals often conflict with existing policies. They feel that promises for healthier food are overshadowed by rollbacks in school food and environmental protections.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) also criticized the administration’s commitment to health, stating that policies are making it harder for many to access nutritious food. They stressed the importance of judging actions over words, pointing out the adverse effects of recent cuts to health programs.

In the midst of these discussions, the focus on RFK Jr.’s efforts may distract from the widespread barriers to accessing healthy food and healthcare.

As experts continue to assess the findings and proposals, the overarching sentiment is that the draft report needs a more robust commitment to change rather than relying on vague promises and voluntary measures.

For deeper insights on the topic, check out the full reports from sources like the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

Source link