USDA gears up for MAHA dietary guidelines update
(WKBN) – Updated dietary guidelines will soon be coming out of the USDA following the first meeting of the Make America Healthy (MAHA) Commission.
Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. held their first meeting Tuesday for the commission and are working on the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
The group is conducting a 'line by line' review of the Scientific Report of the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee—released in 2024 by the prior administration and will release their guidelines ahead of a December 31, 2025 deadline.
The group said they are looking to make 'holistic process improvements' to ensure transparency and conflicts of interest.
'We are going to make sure the dietary guidelines will reflect the public interest and serve public health, rather than special interests,' HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. said. 'This is a giant step in making America the healthiest country in the world.'
Dietary guidelines have been released by the federal government for more than 100 years offering guidance and advice about what to eat and drink for better health.
Secretary Rollins said, 'It's the dawn of a new day,' adding that the guidelines will be based on 'sound science.'
'The Trump-Vance Administration supports transformational opportunities to create and implement policies that promote healthy choices, healthy families, and healthy outcomes,' she said.
Kennedy has cited 'highly chemically processed foods' as a chief culprit behind an epidemic of chronic disease in the U.S., including ailments such as obesity, diabetes and autoimmune disorders.
USDA canceled $1 billion in funding for schools and food banks that came through two federal programs: Local Food for Schools and Local Food Purchase Assitance Cooperative Agreement. The cuts were made through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in an effort to reduce what it calls government waste. USDA officials said that they are prioritizing replacing programs with 'stable, proven solutions.' For most schools, the programs account for about 2% of food budgets.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
21 minutes ago
- New York Times
What Makes a Food Ultraprocessed? The FDA Is About to Weigh In.
The federal government plans to develop a new definition of ultraprocessed foods, a wide-ranging group of snacks, meals and drinks that have become a cornerstone of the American diet. Nutrition researchers generally define ultraprocessed foods as industrially manufactured products that include ingredients you wouldn't find in your own kitchen, like high-fructose corn syrup or hydrogenated oils. The products also often contain artificial flavors, sweeteners and emulsifiers that make them appealing to consumers and can give them a longer shelf life. In crafting its own definition, the government could examine the chemicals and additives put in foods, the number of ingredients in a product or its overall nutritional content. That description could then be used to shape school lunch policy, regulate the foods available through federal services like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or make recommendations about limiting ultraprocessed food consumption in the U.S. dietary guidelines. The Food and Drug Administration, which is leading the effort in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and other agencies, plans to seek public comment before setting a definition in the coming months. Dr. Marty Makary, the commissioner of the F. D.A., said he expected the definition would encourage companies to label foods as 'non-ultraprocessed' to entice customers, similar to how food manufacturers market their products as being free from added sugars. 'We do not see ultraprocessed foods as foods to be banned,' he said. 'We see them as foods to be defined so that markets can compete based on health.' The idea that consumers may go out of their way to avoid these items reflects growing concerns about the potential harms of ultraprocessed foods, which include many breakfast cereals, instant noodles, protein bars, meal-replacement shakes, flavored yogurts, hot dogs and more. Scientists have increasingly linked ultraprocessed foods to poor health outcomes, such as Type 2 diabetes, heart issues, some types of cancers and gastrointestinal issues. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
CNN
25 minutes ago
- CNN
Top RFK Jr. aide attacks US health system while running company that promotes wellness alternatives
Calley Means has built a following within the 'Make America Healthy Again' movement by railing against the failings of the U.S. health system, often pinning the blame on one issue: corruption. Means, a top aide to Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., was hired as a White House adviser in March. He has used that perch to attack the nation's leading physician groups, federal agencies and government scientists, claiming they only protect their own interests in the nation's $4.9 trillion-a-year industry. In recent interviews, speeches and podcasts he has called the American Medical Association 'a pharma lobbying group,' labeled the Food and Drug Administration 'a sock puppet of industry,' and said federal health scientists have 'overseen a record of utter failure.' Means, however, has his own financial stake in the sprawling health system. He's the co-founder of an online platform, Truemed, that offers dietary supplements, herbal remedies and other wellness products. Some of the vendors featured on Truemed's website are supporters of Kennedy's MAHA movement, which downplays the benefits of prescription drugs, vaccines and other rigorously tested medical products. Kennedy has pledged to run the Department of Health and Human Services with 'radical transparency,' but Means has never had to publicly disclose his own financial details or where exactly they intersect with the policies he's advancing. 'It reeks of hypocrisy,' said Dr. Reshma Ramachandran, a health researcher at Yale University. 'In effect, he is representing another industry that is touting nonregulated products and using his platform within the government to financially benefit himself.' In a written statement, Means said his government work has not dealt with matters affecting Truemed and has focused on issues like reforming nutrition programs and pressuring companies to phase out food dyes. 'Pursuing these large-scale MAHA goals to make America healthy has been the sole focus in my government work,' Means said. Truemed helps users take tax-free money out of their health savings accounts, or HSAs, to spend on things that wouldn't normally qualify as medical expenses, such as exercise equipment, meal delivery services and homeopathic remedies — mixtures of plants and minerals based on a centuries-old theory of medicine that's not supported by modern science. The business model caught the attention of the IRS last year, which issued an alert: 'Beware of companies misrepresenting nutrition, wellness and general health expenses as medical care.' Truemed co-founder and CEO, Justin Mares, said in a statement the company is 'in full alignment' with IRS guidelines. 'Truemed enables patients to work with providers to use medical funds for root cause interventions like exercise and vitamin D to reverse disease under current law,' Mares said. The full extent of Means' potential conflicts — including his personal investments— are unclear because of his status as a special government employee. Unlike presidential appointees and other senior officials, special government employees are temporary staffers who do not have to leave companies or sell investments that could be impacted by their work. Also, their financial disclosure forms are shielded from public release. 'It's a big problem,' says Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer under George W. Bush now at the University of Minnesota. Painter and other experts have raised alarms over a whirlwind of Trump administration actions to dismantle the government's public integrity guardrails. Still, part-time government employees are subject to the same law that bars all federal staffers from working on issues that could directly benefit their finances. When such cases arise, they must recuse themselves or risk criminal penalties. Means regularly opines on matters before HHS, including rethinking the use of drugs for depression, weight loss, diabetes and other conditions. Recently he's been promoting a new government report that calls for scaling back prescription medications in favor of exercise, dietary changes and other alternatives. 'If we rely less on our medical system, less on drugs, it necessitates the spiritual, cultural conversation about what we're doing to our children's bodies,' Means said in a recent podcast appearance. Experts note that government ethics rules are intended to both prevent financial conflict violations, but also the appearance of such conflicts that might undermine public trust in government. 'If I were running the ethics office over at HHS, I sure as heck wouldn't want anybody going around giving interviews and speeches about government matters that could have an effect on their own financial interests,' Painter said. Means' rapid rise reflects the seeming contradictions within the MAHA movement itself, which urges followers to distrust both big corporations and the government agencies which regulate them. Means rails against big pharma and food conglomerates, two industries that he says he spent years working for as a consultant in Washington. Means has no medical training. A graduate of Harvard Business School, he previously ran a bridal gown startup with his wife. On Wednesday, he's scheduled to be the keynote speaker at FDA's annual science forum, according to a copy of the program shared with The Associated Press. He traces his passion for health care reform to the death of his mother from pancreatic cancer in 2021. Shortly thereafter, Means and his sister, Dr. Casey Means, took psychedelics together and had 'a mind-blowing, life-changing experience,' which led them to co-author a wellness book, launch separate health startups and begin appearing on podcasts. Casey Means was recently nominated to be surgeon general and has faced scrutiny over her qualifications, including an unfinished medical residency. Asked about her nomination, President Donald Trump said: 'Bobby thought she was fantastic,' adding that he did not know her. Meanwhile, her brother has stepped up his rhetoric for the MAHA agenda, recently declaring that Kennedy has 'a spiritual mandate to reform our broken system.' While promoting the administration's accomplishments, Means does not shy away from plugging his own brand or those of his business partners. When asked to offer health advice to listeners of a sports podcast, Outkick The Show, in April, Means said: 'Read our book, 'Good Energy.'' He also recommended blood tests sold by Function Health, which provides subscription-based testing for $500 annually. The company was cofounded by Dr. Mark Hyman, a friend of Kennedy and an investor in Truemed, which also offers Hyman's supplements through its platform. Casey Means is also an investor in Hyman's company. 'If you're sick, most likely you have some kind of nutrient deficiency, some kind of biomarker that you can actually then target with your diet and your supplements,' Calley Means said. Like dietary supplements, the marketing claims on laboratory tests sold by Hyman are not approved by the FDA. The agency has warned for years about the accuracy of such tests and tried to start regulating them under President Joe Biden. Experts say MAHA entrepreneurs like Hyman are following a playbook common to the wellness industry: Identify a health concern, market a test to diagnose it and then sell supplements or other remedies to treat it. 'It ends up favoring these products and services that rest on flimsy grounds, at the expense of products that have actually survived a rigorous FDA approval process,' said Dr. Peter Lurie, a former FDA official who is now president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Many of the items sold via Truemed, including sweat tents, cold plunge tanks and light therapy lamps, wouldn't typically qualify as medical expenses under rules for HSAs, tax-free accounts created by Congress to manage medical costs. The IRS generally states that HSA purchases must help diagnose, cure, treat, mitigate or prevent disease. Truemed allows users to request a 'letter of medical necessity' from a doctor, stating that the product in question could have medical value for them. Like other telehealth services, there's usually no real-time communication with the patient. The physician reviews a 'simple survey solution,' filled out by the Truemed user, according to the company's website. Industry representatives say customers should be careful. 'You need to be prepared to defend your spending habits under audit,' said Kevin McKechnie, head of the American Bankers Association's HSA council. 'Companies are popping up suggesting they can help you manage that process and maybe they can — so the debate continues.' Americans have an estimated $147 billion in HSA accounts, a potential windfall for companies like Truemed that collects fees for transactions made using their platforms. Means sees an even bigger opportunity — routing federal funds out of government programs and into more HSAs. 'The point of our company is to steer medical dollars into flexible spending,' Means told fitness celebrity Jillian Michaels, on her podcast last year. 'I want to get that $4.5 trillion of Medicare, Medicaid, everything into a flexible account.' Means' pitch for expanding HSAs echoes two decades of Republican talking points on the accounts, which were created in 2003 to encourage Americans in high-deductible plans to be judicious with their health dollars. But HSAs have not brought down spending, economists say. They are disproportionately used by the wealthiest Americans, who have more income to fund them and a bigger incentive to lower their tax rate. Americans who earn more than $1 million annually are the group most likely to make regular HSA contributions, according to an analysis by the nonprofit Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. More than half Americans with HSAs have balances less than $500. Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' would further expand HSA purchases, making gym memberships and other fitness expenses eligible for tax-free spending. That provision alone is expected to cost the government $10 billion in revenue. 'These are really just tax breaks in the guise of health policy that overwhelmingly benefit people with high incomes,' said Gideon Lukens, a former White House budget official during the Obama and Trump administrations, now with the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Expanding HSA eligibility was listed as a goal for a coalition of MAHA entrepreneurs and Truemed partners, founded by Means, which lobbied Congress last year, according to the group's website. Means said in a statement that the group focused only on broad topics like 'health care incentives and patient choice — but did not lobby for specific bills.' In total, the HSA expansions in Trump's bill are projected to cost the federal government $180 billion over the next 10 years. As HSAs expand to include more disparate products and services, Lukens says the U.S. government will have fewer dollars to expand medical coverage through programs like Medicaid. 'We have a limited amount of federal resources and the question is whether we want to spend that on health and wellness products that may or may not be helpful for wealthy people,' Lukens said.
Time Magazine
29 minutes ago
- Time Magazine
Trump's First Surgeon General: RFK Jr. Purging the CDC Advisory Committee Will Put Lives at Risk
When Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. began his tenure as Health and Human Services Secretary, he pledged, 'We won't take away anyone's vaccines.' However, recent policy changes under his leadership—coupled with the unprecedented dismissal of all 17 members of the CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on June 9—have proven that statement false, raising grave concerns for our nation's COVID-19 response and broader vaccine policies. These shifts not only jeopardize public health but also threaten to erode trust in our health institutions at a critical time. In May 2025, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) introduced a new COVID-19 vaccine framework, limiting access to updated vaccines for Americans aged 65 and older or those with specific risk factors. Furthermore, Secretary Kennedy announced that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) would no longer recommend COVID-19 vaccines for 'healthy' children or pregnant women—bypassing the standard ACIP review process. Compounding these changes, the abrupt removal of ACIP's entire panel of independent experts, who have guided evidence-based vaccine policy for decades, risks destabilizing a cornerstone of public health. These actions collectively restrict access to a vital tool for saving lives and undermine confidence in our health systems. During my tenure as Surgeon General under the first Trump administration, we faced significant public health challenges, from addressing the opioid epidemic by increasing access to Naloxone to launching Operation Warp Speed for the COVID-19 vaccine development effort. The vaccines developed under Trump's first term have proven to be one of our most effective defenses against COVID-19; yet, the current administration's new policies limit their availability, potentially leaving millions vulnerable. The dismissal of ACIP's experts—without a clear plan for replacing them with qualified scientists—further jeopardizes trust in the institutions tasked with protecting Americans. The major flaw in the new vaccine framework is its narrow assessment of risk. Although the immediate dangers of COVID-19 have lessened, it remains a leading cause of death and hospitalization, claiming nearly 50,000 lives in the U.S. in 2024—more than breast cancer or car accidents. The fact is, 75% of Americans have risk factors, such as obesity or diabetes, that increase their vulnerability to severe COVID outcomes. However, the burden is now placed on individuals to self-identify as high risk, creating confusion and inconsistency in access. Unlike other countries with centralized systems for identifying at-risk individuals, the U.S. expects patients—many of whom lack easy access to healthcare—to navigate eligibility alone. Risk assessment should also consider individual circumstances beyond underlying health conditions. A 58-year-old bus driver or healthcare worker faces significantly greater exposure than someone working remotely. By limiting vaccines to specific groups based solely on preexisting health status, the policy overlooks these critical contextual differences. Secretary Kennedy's team argues that there is insufficient evidence to support updated COVID-19 vaccines for healthy Americans under 65, but this claim is flatly unfounded. Years of real-world data demonstrate that vaccines save lives and reduce hospitalizations across all age groups. During the 2023 to 2024 fall and winter season, 95% of those hospitalized for COVID had not received an updated vaccine. While the administration cites other countries' more restrictive vaccine policies, such comparisons ignore the unique health landscape in the U.S., which includes higher obesity rates, worse maternal health outcomes, and uneven healthcare access. The policy also neglects the issue of Long COVID, which affects millions with debilitating symptoms lasting months or years. Though older adults are at higher risk for severe acute infections, Long COVID disproportionately impacts adults aged 35 to 49—and children are also affected. Vaccination reduces the risk of developing Long COVID, an essential reason many healthy individuals choose to stay up-to-date with their vaccines. Particularly concerning is the decision to end COVID vaccine recommendations for 'healthy' pregnant women, which contradicts the FDA's own guidance. Pregnant women face heightened risks of severe COVID outcomes, including death, pre-eclampsia, and miscarriage. Vaccination during pregnancy is crucial—not just for maternal health but also for protecting infants under six months, who cannot be vaccinated and rely on maternal antibodies for protection. Decades of research confirm that vaccines, including COVID vaccines, safely transfer antibodies to newborns, lowering their risk of severe illness. The dismissal of ACIP's members amplifies these concerns. ACIP has been a trusted, science-driven body that ensures vaccines are safe and effective, saving countless lives through its transparent recommendations. Its members, rigorously vetted for expertise and conflicts of interest, provide independent guidance critical to public health. Removing them without clear evidence of misconduct risks replacing qualified scientists with less experienced voices. This move fuels vaccine hesitancy and skepticism about public health decisions, particularly when paired with the bypassing of ACIP's review process for the new COVID vaccine policies. These changes create uncertainty about who can access vaccines. Without clear CDC recommendations, insurance companies may impose their own coverage criteria, potentially increasing costs for a vaccine that was previously free for most Americans. Healthcare providers, lacking federal guidance and ACIP's expertise, may struggle to advise patients, leading to a confusing and inequitable system that limits choice—hardly the 'medical freedom' Secretary Kennedy claims to champion. Ultimately, these actions threaten to erode trust in public health. FDA officials argue the new framework enhances transparency, yet bypassing ACIP's review and dismissing its members undermines that aim. Extensive data demonstrate that updated vaccines lower hospitalization and death rates, yet this evidence was sidelined. Such actions breed skepticism, making it harder to unite Americans around shared health goals. The stakes are high, but a better path is possible. Restoring trust requires transparent, evidence-based policymaking that prioritizes access to life-saving tools. I urge Secretary Kennedy and the administration to reconsider this framework, reinstate ACIP's role in vaccine policy, and ensure any new appointees are qualified, independent experts. If concerns about ACIP exist, they should be addressed through reform, not dissolution. Healthcare providers and community leaders must also educate patients about vaccination benefits, particularly for vulnerable groups like pregnant women and those with high exposure. Individuals can take action by staying informed, discussing vaccination with their doctors, and advocating for clear, equitable access to vaccines. By working together—government, providers, and citizens—we can protect lives, reduce the burden of Long COVID, and rebuild confidence in our public health system. We must seize this opportunity to unite around science and ensure a healthier, safer, and prosperous future for all Americans.
