A significant shake-up in how food ingredients are approved is underway, potentially affecting everything from your morning cereal to evening snacks. U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has directed the Food and Drug Administration to revamp rules that have allowed countless food additives to enter the market without official review.
The directive, announced March 10, targets a regulatory system that many health advocates have criticized for decades. At issue is the “Generally Recognized As Safe” (GRAS) designation—a pathway that has permitted food manufacturers to determine the safety of their own ingredients without mandatory FDA notification since 1997.
This regulatory overhaul could dramatically change what goes into your food and how companies disclose their ingredients to the public. Here’s what’s happening and why it matters for every American kitchen.
How food ingredients slipped through the cracks
The current food safety system has roots stretching back to 1958, when Congress established the GRAS system as part of the Food Additives Amendment. Originally, this designation covered common ingredients with long histories of safe use—think salt, sugar, and vinegar.
The system made practical sense initially. The FDA would maintain a published list of approved GRAS substances, providing clear guidance to manufacturers and consumers alike. However, a significant shift occurred in 1997 when the agency changed its rules to allow companies to independently determine whether their ingredients qualified as GRAS without notifying the FDA.
This created what critics describe as a massive loophole. Under this self-affirming process, companies could introduce new additives without public disclosure or independent safety verification.
The Pew Charitable Trusts has estimated approximately 1,000 ingredients have entered the food supply through this self-certification process, many without any public record. This means even vigilant consumers reading labels have no way of knowing about certain substances in their food.
Why the change is happening now
Kennedy’s directive takes direct aim at this self-certification pathway, calling it “a loophole that has allowed new ingredients and chemicals, often with unknown safety data, to be introduced into the U.S. food supply without notification to the FDA or the public.”
The timing reflects growing consumer demand for transparency in food production and increasing scientific concerns about chemical additives. Recent studies have highlighted potential risks associated with certain food additives, particularly for children and vulnerable populations.
Acting FDA Commissioner Sara Brenner has expressed support for the directive, emphasizing the agency’s commitment to ensuring thorough reviews of ingredients that come into contact with food products.
Food safety experts have long criticized the self-approval process. Kris DeAngelo, associate director at the Institute for Food Laws and Regulations, described the current system as creating “a fox guarding the hen house scenario”—where companies evaluating their own products face obvious conflicts of interest between safety and profit motives.
What changes consumers might notice
If implemented as expected, the FDA’s new rules would require companies to publicly notify the agency about new ingredients they wish to introduce, along with supporting safety data. This increased transparency could lead to several noticeable changes:
More detailed ingredient labels might appear on packaged foods as previously undisclosed additives would need proper listing.
Some products could disappear temporarily from shelves if their ingredients fail to meet new public disclosure requirements.
Reformulated versions of familiar products might emerge as manufacturers adapt to stricter oversight.
Food prices could see modest increases as compliance costs rise for manufacturers.
The changes could particularly impact newer food categories like plant-based alternatives and functional foods, which often rely on novel ingredients to achieve desired tastes and textures.
Potential hurdles to implementation
While the directive sets ambitious goals for improving food safety, several challenges could affect its implementation. Industry observers point to the FDA’s already stretched resources as a primary concern.
The FDA faces significant staffing and funding limitations that could hinder its ability to review an influx of new ingredient applications. Without additional resources, the agency might struggle to process submissions in a timely manner, potentially creating bottlenecks in food innovation and production.
Food science consultant Bryan Quoc Le notes that the FDA is “already overwhelmed with its current workload,” raising questions about the practical feasibility of additional regulatory responsibilities.
Another concern involves potential legal challenges from food manufacturers who have operated under the current system for decades. Industry groups may argue that changing long-established practices could unfairly disrupt business operations and food supply chains.
The changing landscape of food innovation
The directive comes at a time when food technology is advancing rapidly. Modern food production increasingly incorporates techniques like synthetic biology and precision fermentation to create new ingredients and improve sustainability.
These innovations make robust safety assessments more important than ever, as novel production methods may introduce unforeseen risks. Experts emphasize that a strong regulatory framework benefits both consumers and industry by building public trust in new food technologies.
Consumer advocacy groups have generally welcomed the announcement, noting that Americans deserve to know what’s in their food and that all ingredients should meet basic safety standards regardless of how they’re produced.
What this means for your kitchen
For the average consumer, these regulatory changes could eventually provide greater confidence in the safety of packaged foods. Over time, the initiative may lead to the removal of questionable additives from the market or require additional testing to confirm their safety.
In the short term, however, changes may not be immediately visible. The rule-making process typically takes months or years to implement fully, with opportunities for public comment and industry feedback along the way.
Food safety advocates recommend that consumers stay informed about the developing regulations and consider supporting increased funding for FDA food safety programs. Some also suggest focusing on whole, minimally processed foods as a way to reduce exposure to food additives until the new system is fully implemented.
The future of food safety regulation
As the FDA works to implement Kennedy’s directive, the agency will need to balance several competing interests: protecting public health, supporting food innovation, and maintaining affordable food prices.
Success will likely depend on whether the FDA receives the resources necessary to fulfill its expanded oversight role. Without adequate staffing and funding, even the most well-intentioned regulations may face implementation challenges.
The initiative represents the most significant potential change to food ingredient regulation in decades. For American consumers increasingly concerned about what goes into their food, this regulatory shift signals a move toward greater transparency and potentially safer food options on grocery shelves nationwide.
