Food Politics by Marion Nestle https://www.foodpolitics.com/ Fri, 29 May 2026 13:00:45 +0000 en-US hourly 1 106065139 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/weekend-reading-industry-influenced-opinion-of-the-week/ Weekend reading: Industry influenced opinion of the week https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/957479222/0/foodpolitics~Weekend-reading-Industry-influenced-opinion-of-the-week/ Fri, 29 May 2026 13:00:42 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28535 I usually do posts about conflicts of interest on Mondays, but wanted to acknowledge the death of Carlo Petrini right away this week.  So here’s the Monday post. David A Cleveland, Research Professor in the Department of Geography, and Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara, sent this one: Skimming through this I found an […]

The post Weekend reading: Industry influenced opinion of the week appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> I usually do posts about conflicts of interest on Mondays, but wanted to acknowledge the death of Carlo Petrini right away this week.  So here’s the Monday post.

David A Cleveland, Research Professor in the Department of Geography, and Environmental Studies, University of California, Santa Barbara, sent this one:

Skimming through this I found an emphasis on ‘nuance’, obscuring key distinctions, and calls for more research, while giving little attention to the fundamental basics that could be the basis for nutrition + env dietary guidelines, e.g. that same nutrients from animal-source foods have much higher climate and environmental impact than those nutrients from plant foods, or imported and off-season produce has higher impact than local in season.

The study: Conrad, Z. 2026. Should the Dietary Guidelines for Americans include sustainability? A critical perspective. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition:101309. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajcnut.2026.101309.

Its conclusion: “The federal government, which has responsibility for translating the scientific evidence into publicly accessible dietary guidance, is not currently well-positioned to communicate the nuances of nutrition-sustainability science to the general public.”

Conflict of interest: “ZC has received research awards for diet sustainability projects from the United States Department of Agriculture (Pulse Crop Health Initiative), the Jeffress Trust Awards Program for Research Advancing Health Equity, American Pistachio Growers, the National Dairy Council, and the National Pork Board.”

Comment: The beef industry did not pay for this commentary and neither did the dairy industry, both big contributors to greenhouse gas emissions.  The author reports working on sustainability projects for the dairy and pork industries, and understands the financial connections as posing conflicted interests, which they most certainly do.

The study begins with a useful review of attempts to get sustainability into the dietary guidelines, starting with the groundbreaking 1980 paper by Joan Gussow and Kate Clancy, “Dietary Guidelines for Sustainability” [16].  It covers the valiant attempt by the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee to recommend consideration of sustainability when making recommendations about intake of red meat. (here’s my version of that bizarre saga).  But the author concludes that we just don’t know enough about sustainability to make such recommendations.  I think we do.

The post Weekend reading: Industry influenced opinion of the week appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28535 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/artificial-sweeteners/ Artificial sweeteners: risks vs. benefits? https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/957423227/0/foodpolitics~Artificial-sweeteners-risks-vs-benefits/ Thu, 28 May 2026 13:00:02 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28528 The FDA says artificial sweeteners are safe at current levels of use.  It has established Acceptable Daily Intakes for most of them.  These levels are much, much higher than anyone is likely to consume in a day. But: The benefits and risk of these sweeteners continue to be debated. The Benefits? Rethinking sweetness in an […]

The post Artificial sweeteners: risks vs. benefits? appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> The FDA says artificial sweeteners are safe at current levels of use.  It has established Acceptable Daily Intakes for most of them.  These levels are much, much higher than anyone is likely to consume in a day.

But: The benefits and risk of these sweeteners continue to be debated.

The Benefits?

The Risks?

Comment

I continue to be baffled by artificial sweeteners.  I don’t knowingly eat them.  I don’t eat anything artificial, and I particularly do not like the taste of alternative sweeteners.  If I want to avoid sugar, I can and do.  Substitutes don’t work for me.

With that said, how harmful are they?  I wish I knew.  Plenty of studies suggest harm.  But the science is especially hard to do because sweeteners are typically consumed in such small amounts.

My advice about artificial sweeteners?  Avoid them if you can; they might be harmful and they are markers of ultra-processed foods.  If you cannot or do not want to avoid them, try to keep intake as low and infrequent as possible.  As with everything else in nutrition, the best way to prevent problems is to eat a wide variety of relatively unprocessed foods in small amounts.

Additional resources

Gary Ruskin reminds me that US Right to Know has fact sheets on sweeteners.

The post Artificial sweeteners: risks vs. benefits? appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28528 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/greenpeace-finds-microplastics-in-baby-food-pouches/ Greenpeace finds microplastics in baby food pouches https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/957364373/0/foodpolitics~Greenpeace-finds-microplastics-in-baby-food-pouches/ Wed, 27 May 2026 13:00:58 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28531 Yes, I know baby food pouches are convenient and let babies feed themselves without making a mess. But I can think of so many reasons not to use them.  Baby food pouches: Contain foods that are generally too sweet. Contain homogenious textures. Do not teach babies about the color, taste, and texture of real foods. […]

The post Greenpeace finds microplastics in baby food pouches appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> Yes, I know baby food pouches are convenient and let babies feed themselves without making a mess.

But I can think of so many reasons not to use them.  Baby food pouches:

  • Contain foods that are generally too sweet.
  • Contain homogenious textures.
  • Do not teach babies about the color, taste, and texture of real foods.
  • Do not promote small motor skills.
  • Undermine baby-led weaning (exploring real foods).

Now here is one more reason to avoid them: microplastics.

Greenpeace has measured microplastics in Gerber baby food pouches.  As the press release says,

A new investigation commissioned by Greenpeace International has found microplastics in every baby food pouch it tested, and estimates that a single Gerber pouch contains more than 5,000 microplastic particles and more than 11,000 in a Happy Baby Organics pouch. The study traced the likely source to the plastic lining of the pouches themselves.

The report, Tiny Plastics, Big Problem: The Hidden Health Risks of Baby Food Plastic Pouches, and an accompanying technical report, reveal:

  • Researchers found up to 270 microplastic particles per teaspoon in Gerber pouches and up to 495 microplastic particles per teaspoon in Happy Baby Organics.
  • The study found at least one endocrine disrupting chemical in the packaging and the food.
  • The research suggests a link between polyethylene, the plastic lining the pouches, and some of the microplastics found in the baby food.

Greenpeace USA is calling on baby food companies to use packaging that will be safer for babies.  Sounds like a good idea.

This gives me an excuse to share what I’ve collected recently about microplastics.

Comment

As I see it, this issue has reached an action level.

  • Do what you can to avoid buying food and drinks in plastic containers.
  • Don’t let babies eat from plastic containers.
  • Let companies know you want them to use safer containers.
  • Applaud companies that change their packaging.

The post Greenpeace finds microplastics in baby food pouches appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28531 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/is-big-food-in-trouble-five-existential-threats/ Is Big Food in trouble? Five existential threats. https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/957300992/0/foodpolitics~Is-Big-Food-in-trouble-Five-existential-threats/ Tue, 26 May 2026 13:00:58 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28527 It’s impossible not to notice all the reports of declining food sales.  I’ve been talking about four existential threats to the food industry: Robert F. Kennedy Jr (“The food industry is poisoning America”) Ultra-processed foods (dietary guidelines advise eating less of them) GLP-1 drugs (they reduce food intake) Inflation (people can’t afford to overeat) To […]

The post Is Big Food in trouble? Five existential threats. appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> It’s impossible not to notice all the reports of declining food sales.  I’ve been talking about four existential threats to the food industry:

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr (“The food industry is poisoning America”)
  • Ultra-processed foods (dietary guidelines advise eating less of them)
  • GLP-1 drugs (they reduce food intake)
  • Inflation (people can’t afford to overeat)

To these, I must add now one more.

  • SNAP restrictions (they decrease purchases of sodas and sweets)

The crisis

Effects on Big Food companies

The bottom line: Eating less is bad for business.

The post Is Big Food in trouble? Five existential threats. appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28527 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/rip-carlo-petrini-a-huge-loss-to-the-food-world-and-to-humanity/ RIP Carlo Petrini: a huge loss to the food world and to humanity https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/957234635/0/foodpolitics~RIP-Carlo-Petrini-a-huge-loss-to-the-food-world-and-to-humanity/ Mon, 25 May 2026 13:00:18 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28537 Carlo Petrini and Slow Food acolytes in Turin, 2016.   As a member of Slow Food USA, I received its notice about the death of its founder, Carlo Petrini, at age 76 in Bra, Italy. A visionary leader and public intellectual with a profound commitment to the common good, human relationships, and the natural world, […]

The post RIP Carlo Petrini: a huge loss to the food world and to humanity appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]>

Carlo Petrini and Slow Food acolytes in Turin, 2016.

 

As a member of Slow Food USA, I received its notice about the death of its founder, Carlo Petrini, at age 76 in Bra, Italy.

A visionary leader and public intellectual with a profound commitment to the common good, human relationships, and the natural world, Carlo Petrini founded Slow Food, the international Terra Madre gathering, and the University of Gastronomic Sciences in Pollenzo. Through these initiatives, he brought to life a global movement rooted in the values of good, clean, and fair food for all, connecting communities, farmers, food artisans, cooks, activists, and young people across the world.

Much has and will be written about his monumental importance to the Slow Food movement and to the food movement in general.  His story about its founding is legendary, triggered as it was by the placement of a McDonald’s at the base of the Spanish Steps in Rome.  Slow Food was to be the opposite of Fast Food—a celebration of the deliciousness of traditional, “real” foods consumed around the world.  He taught the world to treasure them.

He also established the University of Gastronomy in Bra, an exciting place; I taught there once.

Alas, I do not speak Italian, so I never got to know him well.  But I heard him speak many times (particularly enjoyably when translated by Corby Kummer).  I thought he was brilliant, and funny.  Our meetings were always warm and affectionate.

Here is one memory.  At the Slow Food Terra Madre in Turin in 2016, he drove up to me on an electric bike and insisted I get on it immediately.  I took the photo right after that.  There he was, surrounded by adoring fans.  I count myself among them.

This is an irreplaceable loss to the food movement, to humanity, and to me.

Other remembrances

The post RIP Carlo Petrini: a huge loss to the food world and to humanity appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28537 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/dogs-and-cannabis-edibles-readers-weigh-in/ Dogs and cannabis edibles: readers weigh in https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/956977367/0/foodpolitics~Dogs-and-cannabis-edibles-readers-weigh-in/ Fri, 22 May 2026 13:00:51 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28517 When I wrote about dogs getting stoned on cannabis edibles last week, I had no idea this was a thing. From Bill Nesheim (my sort of son-in-law): This has been a fairly big problem for hikers in New Hampshire.   I’ve seen a number of situations where dogs needed to be rescued from the mountains due […]

The post Dogs and cannabis edibles: readers weigh in appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> When I wrote about dogs getting stoned on cannabis edibles last week, I had no idea this was a thing.

From Bill Nesheim (my sort of son-in-law):

This has been a fairly big problem for hikers in New Hampshire.   I’ve seen a number of situations where dogs needed to be rescued from the mountains due to eating edibles dropped on the trail.  Here’s an example:  https://www.facebook.com/groups/hikenh4k/posts/10162254129628724/.

He then sent me another example (you can’t make this stuff up): Owner warns hikers after dogs sickened on trail: Dogs test positive for THC after eating human feces.  And yet another that cost an $800 veterinary bill.

From Michael Jacobson (founder, CSPI, now director of the National Food Museum):

I can relate.  Guests left an unzipped backpack in our basement. Shortly after they arrived, Oliver was moaning, unable to walk. We thought he had a stroke, but when we rushed him to the vet their verdict was that he was stoned. Turned out that our dear guests had two THC-chocolate bars in their backpack, which Oliver decided to eat. Twenty-four hours and two thousand dollars later, Oliver was back to normal.

From Tamar Haspel (science writer, Washington Post)

I saw your piece today — maybe worth mentioning that, if your dog eats weed brownies, it’s often the chocolate, not the weed, that poses the threat.

And how do I know this? Because Kevin and I visited friends in NY, and we had a bag of weed brownies in our luggage. Their beloved King Charles Cavalier spaniel excavated our bag to find them, and ate the whole thing. We came home from the theater that night and he was being really weird, so we figured it out and took him to the emergency vet, who assured us that the weed wasn’t going to be a problem – he’d just be stoned for a while – but they kept him for 2 days because of chocolate toxicity.

We were SO worried that we killed our friends’ dog! But he was fine.

Comment

Tamar is right about chocolate, especially dark chocolate.  It is not recommended for dogs; they don’t metabolize theobromine or caffeine well.  Dark chocolate can have a 3% fatality rate.

Dogs will eat anything!

The bottom line for pets: keep them away from owners’ and friends’ cannabis edibles.

The bottom line for kids: keep them away from all cannabis edibles, whether intended for humans or pets.

Addition, May 22

A reader, Mollie Morrissette of Pet Food Safety News wrote to point out that cat owners need to be careful about THC in cats.  Apparently, cats’ livers lack key glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) enzymes responsible for processing and eliminating organic compounds like THC and its by-products.  This means that THC toxins can last longer in a cat’s system.

 

The post Dogs and cannabis edibles: readers weigh in appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28517 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/the-effects-of-glp-1-drugs-on-the-food-industry-a-collection-of-recent-items/ The effects of GLP-1 drugs on the food industry: A collection of recent items https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/956881106/0/foodpolitics~The-effects-of-GLP-drugs-on-the-food-industry-A-collection-of-recent-items/ Thu, 21 May 2026 13:00:48 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28501 You might think of GLP-1 drugs as miracles of modern medicine, but the food industry views them as a threat. Why?  Eating less is bad for business. The Threat Data: Alarming new research reveals threat GLP-1s pose to food and drink sector: New research has revealed that as many as 8% of Britons now use weight […]

The post The effects of GLP-1 drugs on the food industry: A collection of recent items appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> You might think of GLP-1 drugs as miracles of modern medicine, but the food industry views them as a threat.

Why?  Eating less is bad for business.

The Threat

How food companies are responding

When customers go off the drugs

 

 

The marketing opportunities

The post The effects of GLP-1 drugs on the food industry: A collection of recent items appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28501 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/scotlands-new-stocking-rules/ Scotland’s new stocking rules https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/956772542/0/foodpolitics~Scotlands-new-stocking-rules/ Wed, 20 May 2026 13:00:17 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28522 While we are on the subject of stocking standards for grocery stores, take a look at what’s happening in Scotland. Less sugar, more pressure: Scotland’s HFSS rules force a food industry rethink:  With Scotland’s HFSS restrictions arriving in October, food manufacturers are under mounting pressure to reformulate products without sacrificing taste, texture or brand identity… […]

The post Scotland’s new stocking rules appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> While we are on the subject of stocking standards for grocery stores, take a look at what’s happening in Scotland.

Less sugar, more pressure: Scotland’s HFSS rules force a food industry rethink:  With Scotland’s HFSS restrictions arriving in October, food manufacturers are under mounting pressure to reformulate products without sacrificing taste, texture or brand identity… Read more

Scotland, it seems, has new regulations coming into effect in October.  These restrict promotions and prime shelf placements for foods high in fat, sugar, and salt (HFSS).

The rules say

  • No HFSS products allowed at prime sale points such as checkouts, aisle ends, store entrances, and waiting areas.
  • No multibuy promotions allowed.
  • No free refills of soft drinks.

When England did this in 2022, the number of HFSS products sold dropped, perhaps by as much as 2 million per day—putting huge pressure on food companies to reformulate.

The big issue: What will people buy instead?

The philosophical question: Is a reformulated ultra-processed food necessarily a good choice?  It will still be ultra-processed.

Bring on the evaluators!  I can’t wait to see the research results.

The post Scotland’s new stocking rules appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28522 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/usda-expands-stocking-standards-for-retailers-who-serve-snap-recipients/ USDA expands stocking standards for retailers who serve SNAP recipients https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/956659580/0/foodpolitics~USDA-expands-stocking-standards-for-retailers-who-serve-SNAP-recipients/ Tue, 19 May 2026 13:00:01 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28520 The USDA has announced that retailers who serve SNAP recipients will now have to carry more real food.  As of fall 2026, Retailers authorized to accept SNAP benefits must now carry seven varieties of items across four categories of staple foods: protein, grains, dairy, and fruits and vegetables. This change more than doubles the requirement […]

The post USDA expands stocking standards for retailers who serve SNAP recipients appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]>

The USDA has announced that retailers who serve SNAP recipients will now have to carry more real food.  As of fall 2026,

Retailers authorized to accept SNAP benefits must now carry seven varieties of items across four categories of staple foods: protein, grains, dairy, and fruits and vegetables. This change more than doubles the requirement of available foods, emphasizes more whole foods, increases the perishable food requirements, and eliminates loopholes that for too long have allowed retailers to count certain snack foods toward their staple food requirements.

The stocking standards final rule and Federal Register notice spell out the details.  Retailers who accept SNAP EBT cards will have to offer at least 7—instead of the former 3—varieties of dairy, vegetables or fruits, grains, and protein.  Some foods that used to count as varieties no longer will: butter, jerky, cheese dip, snack bars, fruit spreads even though they can still be purchased from SNAP benefits.

Comment

As with everything else this administration does, this action requires translation.  At first glance, it looks terrific.  SNAP recipients, especially those without access to supermarkets, will have greater access to fruits and vegetables and other healthy foods.

Access, of course, is only the first step in eating healthier foods.  Affordability and cultural preferences matter even more.

And here’s a clue to what this is really about:

Since the beginning of the Trump Administration, the Food and Nutrition Service has taken action on nearly 3,200 retailers regarding current stocking standards, either for failing to meet them upon application or failing to maintain them once authorized. The latter results in disqualification from accepting SNAP benefits.

As explained by the Food Research & Action Center, the USDA stocking rules will make it difficult for small groceries to meet the requirements, continue to accept SNAP benefits, and stay in business.

Furthermore, according to an analysis by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the new rules have nothing to do with helping SNAP recipients eat more healthfully.  This is because there are no nutrition standards for the varieties: “The irony is not lost on us that the Trump Administration says “eat real food” but won’t require stores to stock it.”

Bottom line: Alas, this looks like yet another mechanism for making SNAP harder to use and reducing the number of participants.

Addition, May 20

Jerry Mande reminds me that there are already lots of stores taking SNAP benefits, and that an increasing proportion of them are convenience stores not exactly famous for carrying healthy foods.  The old (before it had to move to Kansas) Economic Research Service did the store count.

The post USDA expands stocking standards for retailers who serve SNAP recipients appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28520 https://www.foodpolitics.com/2026/05/meat-industry-the-funding-effect/ Meat industry: the funding effect https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/956536997/0/foodpolitics~Meat-industry-the-funding-effect/ Mon, 18 May 2026 13:00:33 +0000 https://www.foodpolitics.com/?p=28518 Navid Teimouri, who is at the School of Public Health, University of Queensland, sent me his team’s recently published analysis of meat industry sponsored nutrition studies and their outcomes: Is Meat Industry Affiliation Associated With Study Conclusion in Nutrition Research? A Meta-Research Review. This is a classic study of what the late Sheldon Krimsky called […]

The post Meat industry: the funding effect appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> Navid Teimouri, who is at the School of Public Health, University of Queensland, sent me his team’s recently published analysis of meat industry sponsored nutrition studies and their outcomes: Is Meat Industry Affiliation Associated With Study Conclusion in Nutrition Research? A Meta-Research Review.

This is a classic study of what the late Sheldon Krimsky called the “funding effect,” the bias toward favorable results caused by industry sponsorship of research.

The authors examined 500 research studies of meat and health outcome.

The results:

Of 500 included studies, 78 (15.6%) reported industry involvement. Studies with industry ties were 16 times more likely to report favorable conclusions regarding meat consumption (odds ratio [OR] = 16.4, 95% CI: 7.5–35.8), and there was a significant association (p < 0.001) between industry involvement and study conclusion.

The conclusion:

Meat industry involvement significantly increases the likelihood of favorable study conclusions in nutrition research. These findings underscore the need for caution when interpreting research funded or associated with the meat industry and emphasize the importance of minimizing conflicts of interest in nutrition research.

Comment

When I wrote my book, Unsavory Truth, I could only find a few funding-effect studies dealing with food or nutrition.  This one adds to the collection.  It confirms previous findings.  Only a small percent of nutrition research is industry funded, but those studies are more likely to find results favoring the sponsor’s commercial interests than those that are not industry funded.  Why?  Food companies are unlikely to sponsor research that might find their products harmful.  Sheldon Krimsky mostly looked at studies funded by the pharmaceutical drug industry.  Studies funded by food or nutrition companies share similar biases.

The post Meat industry: the funding effect appeared first on Food Politics by Marion Nestle

]]> 28518