The Food and Drug Administration will consider a petition to revoke the safety status of dozens of processed refined carbohydrates. U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced the development in remarks that aired Sunday. The FDA will take up a request from former agency Commissioner David Kessler. Kessler asked the agency last August to remove corn syrup and numerous other sweeteners and starches from the list of ingredients classified as GRAS, or Generally Recognized as Safe. “We will act on David Kessler’s petition,” Kennedy told CBS’ “60 Minutes” program. He added that the questions Kessler raises are ones “FDA should’ve been asking a long, long time ago.”
Kennedy and Kessler argue that the GRAS classification, enacted by Congress in 1958, has a fundamental flaw. It allows the use of ingredients without a full government safety review. Food companies can verify the safety of those items internally without oversight. Kennedy stated he intends to close that loophole, pending White House approval. “There is no way for any American to know if a product is safe if it is ultraprocessed,” he said. The Consumer Brands Association, a trade group, defended current practices. It stated that food companies already adhere to FDA’s science and risk-based evaluation. The group called the GRAS process important for innovation and expressed willingness to work with HHS and FDA on revisions to increase consumer transparency.
Kessler’s Campaign and Historical Context
David Kessler, a pediatrician, served as FDA commissioner from 1990 to 1997. During his tenure, he tried to regulate tobacco under the agency. The effort ultimately failed, but it significantly increased public scrutiny of the tobacco industry. Kessler now wants the FDA to take the same approach with large food companies. “We changed how this country views tobacco,” he told the CBS program. “We need to change how this country views these ultraprocessed foods.” His petition targets corn syrup and dozens of other sweeteners and starches. These ingredients are ubiquitous in the American food supply, found in thousands of products from soda to bread to condiments. Kessler argues their widespread use, without modern safety review, contributes directly to the nation’s obesity and chronic disease epidemics.
The GRAS Loophole Explained
The GRAS classification originated in a different era of food science. The 1958 law allowed ingredients “generally recognized” as safe by qualified experts to bypass pre-market approval. Over decades, this provision evolved into a significant loophole. Companies now routinely self-determine that new ingredients meet the GRAS standard without notifying the FDA. Critics argue this allows potentially harmful substances to enter the food supply with zero government oversight. The processed ingredients at issue in Kessler’s petition, however, are not novel. They have been used for decades. Revoking their GRAS status would force companies to either prove their safety through modern scientific methods or remove them from products. This would represent a seismic shift in food regulation, potentially reshaping the entire processed food industry.
Kennedy’s Public Health Agenda
Kennedy’s campaign against processed foods and artificial dyes has been a hallmark of his tenure. The Trump administration recently announced new dietary guidelines urging Americans to eat more protein and less sugar while avoiding highly processed foods. However, Kennedy stopped short of calling for new government regulations on “60 Minutes.” “I’m not saying that we’re going to regulate ultraprocessed food,” he clarified. “Our job is to make sure that everybody understands what they’re getting, to have an informed public.” This stance emphasizes transparency and consumer education over command-and-control regulation. It aligns with a broader administration philosophy of reducing regulatory burden while increasing information flow. The FDA’s consideration of Kessler’s petition fits this model: it triggers a review process, not an automatic ban. The outcome depends on the evidence food companies can provide.
Industry Response and Potential Impact
The Consumer Brands Association’s statement reflects an industry preparing for change while defending its practices. Food companies will likely mount a vigorous defense of the processed ingredients at issue. They will commission studies, submit safety data, and lobby regulators. The economic stakes are enormous. Revoking GRAS status for corn syrup alone would disrupt supply chains for thousands of products. Reformulating recipes is costly and time-consuming. Companies may also argue that decades of consumption without widespread acute harm demonstrate safety. Kessler and Kennedy counter that chronic diseases like obesity and diabetes constitute the relevant harm, and that the burden of proof should shift to manufacturers. The FDA’s decision will set a precedent for how the agency handles other ingredients and could fundamentally alter the relationship between regulators and the food industry.
Outlook for Food Regulation
The petition’s fate remains uncertain. The FDA must now formally consider Kessler’s request, a process that could take months or years. Public comment periods, scientific reviews, and potential legal challenges lie ahead. Kennedy’s support signals political will at the highest levels of HHS, but the FDA maintains scientific independence. The outcome will depend on the strength of evidence both sides present. For consumers, the debate highlights growing concerns about the processed food supply, investors, it introduces regulatory risk into sectors previously considered stable. For public health advocates, it represents a long-awaited opportunity to challenge ingredients they believe fuel the obesity crisis. The processed ingredients review is just beginning, but its implications could reshape the American diet for generations.
