More consumer groups fighting FRESH Act – Image for illustrative purposes only (Image credits: Pixabay)
Consumer organizations continued their pushback against a proposed bill that critics argue would erode federal and state oversight of food additives. The FDA Review and Evaluation for Safe, Healthy and Affordable Foods Act, known as the FRESH Act, drew fresh opposition from two prominent groups this week. Introduced by Rep. Kat Cammack, R-Fla., the legislation targets the current system for reviewing substances deemed generally recognized as safe, or GRAS, by the food industry.
Key Elements of the Proposed Legislation
The FRESH Act seeks to streamline the process for introducing new food chemicals while limiting regulatory hurdles. Lawmakers behind the bill described it as a way to enhance efficiency at the Food and Drug Administration. However, opponents highlighted provisions that would preempt state-level regulations on food chemicals.
Under existing rules, companies often self-determine GRAS status for additives, notifying the FDA without mandatory premarket approval. The bill would formalize this approach further, allowing chemicals to enter the market even if the agency fails to respond within 90 days to a notice. It also would retroactively validate all current GRAS substances and permit industry-funded panels to deem new ones safe without full FDA scrutiny.
Environmental Working Group’s Stance
The Environmental Working Group labeled the FRESH Act as industry-driven legislation that weakens an already flawed oversight framework. The organization pointed out that nearly 99 percent of new food chemicals since 2000 have entered the market via the GRAS pathway, bypassing rigorous FDA testing. Melanie Benesh, the group’s vice president for government affairs, described the bill as the food industry’s ideal scenario: minimal federal review paired with blocked state actions.
EWG criticized the proposed funding as insufficient to address longstanding safety gaps. The group argued that the legislation fails to mandate FDA reassessments of existing additives, many of which lack updated safety data. This approach, they said, prioritizes speed over consumer protection.
Opposition from Consumer Reports and CSPI
Consumer Reports joined the criticism, asserting that the bill would prevent states from enforcing their own food safety standards. Brian Ronholm, the group’s director of food policy, stated that the measure comes at a time when public demand for transparency and removal of harmful ingredients has grown. He called for Congress to reject it outright, warning of a step backward in protections.
The Center for Science in the Public Interest had already voiced similar concerns, focusing on the bill’s broad preemption language. CSPI noted that it would override state initiatives like bans on PFAS in packaging, restrictions on artificial dyes in schools, and requirements for heavy metal testing. These efforts, the group said, represent recent gains now at risk from industry lobbying.
Both organizations emphasized the practical fallout for everyday consumers. States have stepped in where federal rules lag, addressing issues from allergens to supplements marketed to children. The FRESH Act’s retroactive and prospective preemption could nullify such measures, consolidating power with manufacturers.
Impacts on GRAS Chemicals and State Authority
At the heart of the debate lies the GRAS exemption, which lets companies introduce additives without FDA pre-approval in most cases. The bill would expand this by accepting abbreviated safety summaries instead of full data, including dietary exposure estimates. It also would allow continued use of phased-out chemicals for up to two years post-FDA objection, barring immediate dangers.
Critics outlined specific risks in a list of the bill’s effects:
- Preempt state bans on toxic PFAS in food packaging and artificial dyes in schools.
- Permit new cancer-linked chemicals as GRAS without FDA safety confirmation.
- Retroactively approve all existing GRAS substances.
- Deem chemicals safe via industry expert panels without delay.
- Enable new uses of additives without agency notification.
Path Forward for Food Safety Oversight
The growing chorus from consumer advocates underscores tensions between industry efficiency goals and public health priorities. With states increasingly active on food policy, the FRESH Act’s passage could reshape the regulatory landscape nationwide. Lawmakers now face pressure to weigh these trade-offs as the bill advances through Congress.
Stakeholders on all sides agree the FDA needs resources to handle its workload, but diverge sharply on how to balance innovation with safety. The debate highlights ongoing challenges in ensuring food additives undergo thorough vetting amid rising consumer scrutiny.
