Researchers claim in an editorial that a loophole permits producers to add novel additives, such natural sweeteners and texture enhancers, to meals without obtaining permission.
The authors of an editorial published on Thursday claim that the Food and Drug Administration’s “hands-off approach” to food additives, which includes those found in energy drinks and ultraprocessed meals, may allow dangerous compounds to infiltrate the country’s food supply.
The FDA has been accused by politicians and public health organizations of failing to act quickly enough to safeguard the public from specific additives found in food goods, such as red dye No. 3 and brominated vegetable oil. The study was published in the American Journal of Public Health.
The FDA outlawed the use of brominated vegetable oil in July following research that suggested the oil may have negative effects on the heart and liver in addition to having possible neurological consequences. The United Kingdom, the European Union, India, and Japan had previously outlawed the substance.
Since two individuals died after consuming Panera’s highly caffeinated “Charged Lemonade” beverages, the agency’s regulation of common substances, including caffeine, has also come under fire.
Jennifer Pomeranz, lead author of the new editorial and associate professor of public health policy and management at the NYU School of Global Public Health, stated that “the FDA really needs to re-evaluate our system.” “We can’t claim that the food we eat is safe.”
Pomeranz and her coauthors concentrated on the FDA’s use of the “Generally Recognized as Safe,” or GRAS, designation to substances that are generally accepted by independent experts to be safe for use in food. FDA permission is not required for ingredients classified as GRAS before they are utilized.
The goal of the rule was to free up FDA resources and streamline the use of simple components like vinegar and salt by eliminating the need for a drawn-out clearance procedure.
But according to Pomeranz, the rule has been used by food companies as a “loophole” to add new ingredients, such as natural sweeteners, preservatives, and texture-enhancing ingredients, that have not yet undergone thorough agency testing. This was discovered during their review of the use of GRAS. According to her, some businesses have also exploited the regulation as an excuse to increase the caffeine content of their goods.
Food makers are not obligated to request an FDA evaluation of new ingredients before they are added to products, though they occasionally do.
Citing prior studies, Pomeranz stated that between 1990 and 2010, an estimated 1,000 chemicals were labelled as GRAS by producers and used without informing the FDA. She continued by saying that, without FDA supervision, a great deal more additives have probably been introduced since then to the country’s food supply.
Based on this self-GRAS process, we have no clue how many compounds are in the food supply, according to Pomeranz. “The food industry essentially determines what is GRAS on its own.”
When asked for comments, the FDA did not answer right away.
Not engaged in the report, Auburn University in Alabama’s associate professor of history Xaq Frohlich stated that, up until a few years ago, the FDA had paid “really minimal” attention to food-related concerns.
This is partially because, according to him, food regulation and monitoring are frequently “sidelined,” with a significant amount of the FDA’s funding coming from fees paid by pharmaceutical corporations to have the agency study medications.
He stated that while the agency still actively tries to prevent food contamination and issue recalls, tasks like nutritional labeling and additive monitoring make up “a very small part of the agency’s day-to-day work.”
Frohlich stated, “I believe that an increasing percentage of its personnel and funding has been allocated to drug use.”
Food business consultant Richard Mattes, a famous nutrition science professor at Purdue University in Indiana, claims that inadequate financing prevents organizations like the FDA from effectively keeping an eye on the safety and nutritional value of food.
He did, however, stand up for the FDA, asserting that it performs “a thorough job of reviewing food ingredients.”
According to him, a food’s safety is more dependent on how consumers choose to use processed goods that have extra substances in them.
“We really wouldn’t have most of the problems that we have now if we were to moderate our consumption so that we stay within our energy needs and have a balanced diet so we don’t get too much or too little of any particular food constituent,” stated Mattes. “It’s not specific to any one chemical.”
Pomeranz stated her ideal scenario would be for the FDA to get increased financing and resources so that it could examine substances before approving them for use in products. She believes that Congress should have some authority over that, adding that the FDA should, at the very least, be allowed to conduct premarket reviews to decide if an ingredient needs to be labeled as GRAS.
“Safety is the main concern,” she stated. “I believe that everyone can agree on safety.”
