Food regulation update January 19: The latest on MAHA and related developments

CHICAGO, January 19, 2025 — IFMA The Food Away from Home Association launched a new benefit for members: A roundup of regulatory developments affecting the food-away-from-home business, including policy changes that are part of the Administration’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) initiative. The report is compiled and written by Dr. Joy Dubost, a renowned food scientist and registered dietitian with strong knowledge of what’s happening on the regulatory front.

FEDERAL UPDATES 

HHS

Further Assessment of the New Dietary Guidelines - The recent update to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) has sparked significant concern among experts and stakeholders due to several fundamental issues in its development as well as within the scientific foundation and accompanying appendices that support the recommendations. As a follow-up to the last week’s coverage below are few notable challenges with these new guidelines.

1. Lack of Transparency - Unlike previous iterations of the DGA that included an extensive and robust procedure, this new process for developing the new guidelines was not transparent. For instance, leading up to the release there was no public disclosure including the opportunity for input by the public by submitting written comments. There were also no public meetings, which generally allow for the opportunity to provide oral comments from stakeholders. Additionally, there was no disclosure of the scientists who assessed the evidence to support the recommendation until the document was published. There were nine new researchers involved in the process with four having clear conflicts of interest, raising questions about the integrity of the recommendations. All of this runs counter to what was stated by HHS Secretary to have a clear and transparent approach.
2. Inconsistent and Biased Review Process - The scientific foundation of the report relied heavily on narrative reviews rather than peer-reviewed, published systematic reviews and meta-analysis, which introduces potential bias. Furthermore, new umbrella reviews were conducted by one identified scientist, but these were neither peer-reviewed nor published prior to publication of the scientific foundation document undermining their credibility and transparency.
3. Flawed Food Pattern Modeling - A lack of comprehensive food pattern modeling led to internal contradictions within the guidelines. This shortcoming makes it difficult to apply the recommendations consistently and undermines their practical value. For instance, if one was to eat the recommended serving sizes of animal proteins it would be difficult to meet the recommendation to limit saturated fat to 10% of calories.
4. Limited Generalizability - Many of the studies selected in the scientific foundation are not generalizable to the general population or target audience of the dietary guidelines. This means that the recommendations may not be relevant or effective for the populations they are intended to serve.
5. Errors and Missing Justification - The report contains blatant errors and lacks sufficient justification for some of its recommendations. For example, white rice was featured in the new food pyramid, however the DGA does not recommend any consumption of refined or enriched grains. This further erodes confidence in the scientific rigor and reliability of the guidelines.
6. Reduced Scientific Rigor - Overall, the science behind many of the new recommendations lacked both transparency and methodological rigor. The new scientific foundation report indicated what recommendations it included from the previous DGA scientific advisory report. Compared to the previous advisory committee report, 54% of the earlier recommendations were removed, 25% were incorporated, and 21% were only partially included. This significant shift raises concerns about the continuity and evidence base of the guidelines.

Overall, the latest DGA have been criticized for their lack of transparency, inconsistent review processes, flawed modeling, limited generalizability, and reduced scientific rigor. These issues highlight the need for a more open, systematic, and evidence-based approach for future guideline development to ensure public trust and effective dietary recommendations.

Dietary Guidelines Backlash - Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has issued a petition with the Offices of Inspector General for HHS and USDA for the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines to be withdrawn and reissued due to rampant industry influence, including the meat and dairy industries. The petition states, “Significant conflicts of interest among the authors of The Scientific Foundation for The Dietary Guidelines, the report upon which the Guidelines are based, have resulted in nutrition recommendations that favor the economic interests of unhealthful food industry associations over the health interests of the general public and put the public at increased risk for cardiovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, and birth defects. Prompt action by the agencies’ Offices of Inspector General is necessary to address the agencies’ dereliction of duties and prevent harm to the American people. The agencies must immediately withdraw the recently published Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030 and reissue new Dietary Guidelines that are consistent with the Scientific Report of the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.”

This could be the first of other petitions or calls for action by members of Congress on the basis of conflict of interest, lack of transparency, and/or inconsistent standards of evidence.

Viral Moments – USDA Secretary Rollins recently suggested that Americans facing financial difficulties consider a cost-effective dinner option that meets the new Dietary Guidelines, recommending a meal comprised of chicken, broccoli, a corn tortilla, and an additional item for approximately $3 per evening. Doesn’t that sound appealing? The clip has already gone viral.

Secretary Kennedy declares the end of war on protein. Interesting as most Americans consume well above the recommended daily allowance (RDA) of 0.8 g/kg of body weight. Similar language was used on saturated fat but the recommendations on limiting intake at 10% of calories did not change in these new guidelines.

HHS posted “real food is back.”

 

USDA

Whole Milk - President Trump signed the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act, restoring access to whole milk in schools and supporting American dairy producers. The legislation aligns with newly released Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2025–2030, which include full-fat dairy as part of a healthy diet. Secretary Brooke Rollins highlighted the benefits for kids, parents, and farmers, emphasizing lower dairy prices and support for rural communities. The law received bipartisan backing from members of Congress and will be implemented by USDA immediately, with guidance issued to school nutrition officials. A proposed rulemaking will help schools offer whole milk quickly, and USDA will update Child Nutrition Programs to match the new guidelines. To celebrate, USDA released a video promoting whole milk.

Summer Meal Programs - USDA Food and Nutrition Services announced an update to the FNS Rural Designation Map for summer meal programs, effective Jan. 1, 2026. This change uses updated federal data sources to define rural areas for the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and the Seamless Summer Option (SSO). The map helps state agencies and sponsors determine if a site qualifies as rural. For details on rural designations and data sources, see policy memorandum SFSP 04-2024, SP 06-2024 Rural Designations in the Summer Meals Programs - Revised.

SNAP – The National Governors Association and other government groups recently called on Congress to include a temporary SNAP amendment in upcoming funding legislation. They argued that recent changes and the autumn shutdown disrupted program operations and created financial risks for states and counties. They requested delaying new cost-sharing rules until fiscal year 2030, using 2027 data to determine further delays instead of data from the 2025-26 transition. USDA has not yet responded.

New Priorities for Research and Development
Secretary Rollins outlined new priorities for USDA-funded research and development activities in the future that are focused on five broad research areas.

• Increasing Profitability of Farmers and Ranchers
• Expanding Markets and Creating New Uses of U.S. Agricultural Products
• Protecting the Integrity of American Agriculture from Invasive Species
• Promoting Soil Health to Regenerate Long-Term Productivity of Land
• Improving Human Health through Precision Nutrition and Food Quality

USDA agencies must ensure that upcoming research projects support these objectives, and the Office of the Chief Scientist is responsible for overseeing implementation and collaborating with other federal agencies.

Product of USA Label – The Food Safety & Inspection Services is preparing to enforce its new voluntary “Product of USA” labeling standard, which took effect January 1, 2026. Meat, poultry, and egg products labeled “Product of the USDA” or “Made in the USA” must be entirely from animals born, raised, slaughtered, and processed in the United States.

FDA

FDA Pesticide Residue Monitoring Report - The FDA’s 2023 Pesticide Residue Monitoring Program Report found that 97.2% of domestic and 86.5% of imported foods met federal standards, though violations in imports were nearly five times higher than domestics. The agency also introduced a new FDA Pesticide Report Data Dashboard for interactive data access.

MAHA

Bills Supported by MAHA

Wisconsin - Bill: AB180 is currently in committee. This bill directs the Department of Health Services (DHS) to seek a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibiting FoodShare benefits from being used to buy candy or soft drinks. FoodShare, Wisconsin’s version of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), is federally funded for benefits and jointly administered by state and federal governments. If the waiver is approved, DHS must enforce this restriction; if denied, DHS must reapply each year until approval is granted.

Bill: AB550 is currently in committee. This bill mandates that any person or company manufacturing packaged food for human consumption in this state must label each product with warning labels revealing the presence of certain ingredients, such as specific color additives, synthetic antioxidants, solvents, sweeteners, stabilizers, thickeners, and preservatives. The warning labels must be highly visible, use high contrast against their backgrounds, and be placed in a clearly noticeable spot. Each label should include the statement: “WARNING: This product contains an artificial color, chemical, or food additive that is banned in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.” Violation of this bill may result in criminal penalties ranging from $100 to $5,000, up to one year of imprisonment, or both. Alternatively, violators may face civil penalties of up to $1,000 per violation. For more details, consult the state and local fiscal estimate provided as an appendix to the bill. Since the bill introduces new crimes or alters penalties for existing ones, the Joint Review Committee on Criminal Penalties may be asked to prepare a report.

Federal – US HR734 is currently in committee. This bill amends the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to require at least 60 days for public comment before implementing major changes to quality control guidance in SNAP (formerly food stamps). State agencies must have time to review and respond to proposed changes affecting their systems, procedures, staffing, or verification processes. The Secretary of Agriculture may issue interim final guidance without delay only in urgent cases, while still allowing public feedback. The measure aims to improve transparency and encourage input from state agencies and advocacy groups before finalizing changes to SNAP administration.

H.R. 6294 – Representatives Don Beyer (D-VA), Mike Lawler (R-NY), and Scott Peters (D-CA) introduced the bipartisan Childhood Diabetes Reduction Act to address childhood obesity and diet-related diseases like diabetes. The bill requires the FDA to add nutrient and health warning labels, bans junk food ads aimed at children, directs NIH to expand research on ultra-processed foods (UPFs), and tasks the CDC with leading a national education initiative on UPF risks and labelling.