WaPo: Food additives on the rise as FDA scrutiny wanes

[proverbialwisdom]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/food-additives-on-the-rise-as-fda-scrutiny-wanes/2014/08/17/828e9bf8-1cb2-11e4-ab7b-696c295ddfd1_story.html

Food additives on the rise as FDA scrutiny wanes
By Kimberly Kindy August 17

The explosion of new food additives coupled with an easing of oversight requirements is allowing manufacturers to avoid the scrutiny of the Food and Drug Administration, which is responsible for ensuring the safety of chemicals streaming into the food supply.

And in hundreds of cases, the FDA doesn’t even know of the existence of new additives, which can include chemical preservatives, flavorings and thickening agents, records and interviews show.

“We simply do not have the information to vouch for the safety of many of these chemicals,” said Michael Taylor, the FDA’s deputy commissioner for food.

The FDA has received thousands of consumer complaints about additives in recent years, saying certain substances seem to trigger asthmatic attacks, serious bouts of vomiting, intestinal-tract disorders and other health problems.

At a pace far faster than in previous years, companies are adding secret ingredients to everything from energy drinks to granola bars. But the more widespread concern among food-safety advocates and some federal regulators is the quickening trend of companies opting for an expedited certification process to a degree never intended when it was established 17 years ago to, in part, help businesses.

<>

“We aren’t saying we have a public health crisis,” Taylor said. “But we do have questions about whether we can do what people expect of us.”

In the five decades since Congress gave the FDA responsibility for ensuring the safety of additives in the food supply, the number has spiked from 800 to more than 9,000, ranging from common substances such as salt to new green-tea extracts. This increase has been driven largely by demand from busy Americans, who get more than half their daily meals from processed foods, according to government and industry records.

<>

[lunasun]

1. You mean it is possible for the F D A to decrease scrutiny even more??

Michael Taylor check his past out ...

[merrily]

2. +1 Just about my reaction to the headline.

They don't think they can do what people expect of them? Then stop collecting your paycheck and make way for someone who can/will. You are not there only to protect the "job creators."

[lunasun]

3. My opinion they collect more than a paycheck wink wink

[merrily]

4. Probably.

[frazzled]

5. The scrutiny decrease was made in 1997

The number of "secret" ingredients has steadily risen and they've found ways around the rules.

This oversight system shifted dramatically in 1997. In response to a shortage of staff members and complaints from industry that the process was too cumbersome and did not improve food safety, the FDA proposed new rules. The agency told companies that were going the GRAS route — which turned a years-long process into one of months — that they no longer would have to submit their research and raw data. The companies can share just a summary of their findings with the agency.

In part, FDA officials hoped that by streamlining the GRAS notification process, companies that previously avoided informing the agency of new additives would be encouraged to keep the government in the loop, current and former agency officials said.

The changes didn’t work out as planned.

For starters, most additives continued to debut without the FDA being notified.

Moreover, companies that did choose to go through the FDA oversight process largely abandoned the formal approval route, opting instead for the new, cursory GRAS process, even for additives that could be considered new and novel, according to agency documents and an analysis of those records by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Your best defense is: eliminate as many processed foods as you can. If you make things yourself, you'll know what is going in is all "GRAS."

[lunasun]

8. Exactly and there has been independent studies on some of these new food additives

Although I do not have time to link so just my hearsay but here is one below

But the results were many are increasingly adding chemicals that are harmful and addictive, however small independent studies can not keep up
And actually you almost have to know the source of whole plain foods too so many retardants are added for shipping shelf life to unprocessed items is fresh food meat etc
I know plenty do not care and just open their mouth to something tasty so the FDA is not going to change and food corps will not with out $$$resistance
An example is you now see some foods labeled as no high fructose inside
Did they do this for health reasons / no
too many consumers were avoiding it and they needed to get back that market share


http://www.whale.to/a/blaylock5.html

There are a growing number of clinicians and basic scientists who are convinced that a group of compounds called excitotoxins play a critical role in the development of several neurological disorders including migraines, seizures, infections, abnormal neural development, certain endocrine disorders, neuropsychiatric disorders, learning disorders in children, AIDS dementia, episodic violence, lyme borreliosis, hepatic encephalopathy, specific types of obesity, and especially the neurodegenerative diseases, such as ALS, Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, Huntington's disease, and olivopontocerebellar degeneration.(1)

An enormous amount of both clinical and experimental evidence has accumulated over the past decade supporting this basic premise.(2) Yet, the FDA still refuses to recognize the immediate and long term danger to the public caused by the practice of allowing various excitotoxins to be added to the food supply, such as monosodium glutamate (MSG), Experimentally, we know that when subtoxic levels of excitotoxins are given to animals in divided doses, they experience full toxicity

[appal_jack]

10. IIRC, we had a Democratic President in 1997.

IIRC, we had a Democratic President in 1997.

We have a Democratic President now.

The FDA functions under the Executive Branch of government (though in fairness, it depends on Congress for funding, as does everyone else).

It's about 17 years too late in this case, but removing that 'expedited' approval process sounds like a good move for our Democratic President Obama and his appointee Michael Taylor in order to undo the 'business-friendly' mistake made by former Democratic President Clinton...

...or y'know, we could just blame Republicans and then rally unquestioningly around the next President Clinton, and then wonder why so little changes for the better, ever.

-app

[Trajan]

6. One known DUer will have no problem with this

Name starts with H and ends with B, yep ...

Good reason to get away from industrialized foods, and visit your local farms, or at least stay in the veggie and fruit aisles as much as possible ...

If it is a plant, eat it ...
If it is made in a plant, don't ...

[djean111]

7. Looks like my avoidance of processed foods - with additives in them - is a pretty good idea.

Yes, I know all foods are "processed" in some way, unless I grow them myself. It is the additives that are skeevy, mostly because we don't know what some of them do. And profit trumps safety.

[lunasun]

9. Some independently studied have addictive properties too yes profit is the goal

[blkmusclmachine]

11. "Change!" ...