Food and Drug Administration

NPPC Weighs in on FDA Food Chemicals Assessments

Tue, 19 May 2026 14:57:19 GMT

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration continues to implement its “bold food agenda.” Not only did FDA take steps to ensure the safety of chemicals used in food production, but it’s finalizing a new post-market assessment program and commencing reassessments of two additives commonly used in a variety of food products.

“Americans want the FDA to take a fresh look at some of the chemical additives that have become widespread in our food supply,” FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said in a release . “By establishing a comprehensive, science-based framework for reviewing chemicals like BHT and ADA, we’re delivering the rigorous oversight Americans deserve. We will act swiftly based on our findings.”

The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) achieved a critical change in one of the two guidance documents for the post-market assessment program.

Based on input from NPPC and other organizations, the FDA made modifications to its previously proposed method for ranking chemicals for assessment, including dropping a broad “other decisional criteria,” which would have allowed food chemical risk scores to be influenced by non-scientific factors. The “Post-Market Assessment Prioritization Tool” document helps identify priority food chemicals – based on certain criteria – for full scientific assessment by focusing on their potential risk to public health, NPPC says.

The second document, “Enhanced Systematic Process for Post-Market Assessment of Chemicals in Food,” describes how the FDA will monitor and triage signals that provide information on hazards, use, or exposure related to food chemicals and how it will prioritize for assessment, evaluate and manage those chemicals in the food supply.

“The FDA’s assessment program provides consumers with confidence that the agency is ensuring chemicals in the U.S. food supply remain safe as new scientific information becomes available,” NPPC says. “The systematic, transparent approach helps protect public health and reinforces the rigorous safety standards that protect American consumers, according to the FDA.”

NPPC points out that its input in the post market assessment ensured that it was based on science and will continue to protect food ingredients already approved and safe in pork products.

FDA Report Shows 16% Increase in Livestock Antimicrobial Sales in 2024

Thu, 08 Jan 2026 21:38:21 GMT

After years of relative stability, U.S. antimicrobial sales for food-producing animals rose in 2024. According to the FDA’s 2024 Summary Report on Antimicrobials Sold or Distributed for Use in Food-Producing Animals , sales of medically important antibiotics increased 16% compared with 2023, marking a notable reversal after nearly a decade of plateauing or declining volumes.

When it comes to cattle, this report raises an important question: Does this increase reflect a temporary response to disease and production pressures, or does it reflect a more durable change in antimicrobial purchasing patterns?

FDA Antimicrobial Sales Trends Show a Clear Rebound

FDA data shows antimicrobial sales for food-producing animals peaked in 2015, followed by sustained declines after growth-promotion indications were removed and veterinary oversight expanded. From 2016 through 2023, total sales largely stabilized or declined modestly, including a 2% decrease from 2022 to 2023.

(FDA)

This pattern changed in 2024. Total antimicrobial sales increased 16% year over year, representing the largest single-year increase since regulatory reforms took effect. While overall volumes remain approximately 27% below 2015 levels, the size and rebound stands out against nearly a decade of gradual reduction.

Which antimicrobial classes increased in 2024?

The 2024 increase was not evenly distributed across antimicrobial classes. Several medically important categories accounted for most of the growth:

Tetracyclines: ~20% increase; remains the largest class by volume
Aminoglycosides: ~37% increase
Lincosamides: ~11% increase

In contrast, penicillins declined by approximately 14%, despite remaining among the most commonly sold classes overall.

The concurrent rise across these classes likely reflects increased disease pressure and production challenges. While FDA sales data cannot identify clinical drivers, the pattern points toward greater reliance on core therapeutic drugs during a challenging production year.

Looking across species, 41% of medically important antimicrobial sales in 2024 were intended for cattle, 43% for swine, and 16% for poultry.

What the Data Show for Cattle

When looking specifically at cattle, tetracycline sales increased ~19%, aminoglycosides increased ~38%, sulfonamides increased ~24% and cephalosporins increased ~26%.

These antimicrobial classes are foundational tools in cattle medicine, particularly for respiratory and systemic disease. Tetracyclines are widely used across beef and dairy systems for bovine respiratory disease, anaplasmosis and reproductive tract infections, supported by broad-spectrum activity, multiple formulations and long-standing familiarity in practice. Aminoglycosides are used more selectively but are important for treating gram-negative and enteric infections, often in more severe cases. Lincosamides are commonly used for respiratory disease and certain anaerobic or foot infections.

To provide additional context, the FDA report also includes biomass-adjusted antimicrobial sales, including an interactive dashboard , which accounts for changes in animal population size and average live weight. This data could be a more meaningful indicator of antimicrobial use intensity.

Biomass-adjusted sales of aminoglycosides, amphenicols, cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, lincosamides, sulfonamides and tetracyclines for cattle all increased from 2023 to 2024 representing a higher intensity of use.

Swine Data Also Showed Increases

The sale of medically important microbial drugs for use in swine increased 13% from 2023 to 2024. While annual sales for swine have been slowly increasing since 2020, this jump is much larger than it has been in previous years.

Looking at specific drug classes, Aminoglycoside sales increased ~25%, fluoroquinolones increased ~49%, sulfonamides increased ~15%, tetracyclines increased ~15%, and lincosamides increased ~13%.

In swine, aminoglycosides and sulfonamides are frequently used to manage enteric and respiratory conditions. Fluoroquinolones and tetracyclines are critical for addressing complex swine respiratory diseases and systemic infections, while lincosamides are often specifically targeted at combating swine dysentery, mycoplasmal pneumonia and infectious arthritis.

Biomass-adjusted sales of these drugs for swine all also increased from 2023 to 2024.

Sales Data are not the same as on-farm use

A critical point emphasized by FDA is sales and distribution data do not directly measure the actual use of antimicrobial drugs on farms. These drugs can be purchased in anticipation of use, be used at a later date or held in inventory for future needs. There is no national system in place that measures antimicrobial use across animal production sectors in real time. Year-to-year fluctuations in sales can reflect many factors including animal health needs, changes in livestock populations and evolving production practices.

Despite the rebound in 2024, food-animal antimicrobial sales remain significantly lower than a decade ago. Even so, the data reinforce the need for stewardship that balances effective disease control with antimicrobial resistance considerations, guided by clinical judgment and herd-level decision-making.

FDA Approves Exzolt Cattle-CA1 for Prevention and Treatment of New World Screwworm

Thu, 04 Dec 2025 19:35:54 GMT

On December 4, 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted conditional approval to Exzolt Cattle-CA1, a fluralaner topical solution from Merck Animal Health, for the use in beef cattle (≥ 2 months of age) and replacement dairy heifers (< 20 months of age). The approved uses include prevention and treatment of larval infestations by New World screwworm (NWS), and treatment and control of cattle fever tick.

“The FDA is leveraging every resource and authority at its disposal to ensure producers and veterinarians have the critical products they need to protect their livestock and safeguard our food supply against NWS and cattle fever tick,” said Timothy Schell, director of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, in a press release . “We remain steadfast in our commitment to ensuring that animal drugs are safe and effective and that food from treated animals is safe to eat.”

While NWS has not yet been detected in the U.S., the threat persists just south of the border with a new case being reported yesterday. Cattle fever ticks, present along the U.S.-Mexico border in south Texas, are competent vectors of Babesia bovis and Babesia bigemina — agents of bovine babesiosis (Texas cattle fever).

“The threat of New World screwworm represents a growing concern to U.S. agriculture, potentially causing devastating economic losses for cattle producers that could reach hundreds of millions of dollars,” said Rick DeLuca, president of Merck Animal Health, in a news release . “We worked closely with the FDA to accelerate availability so that veterinarians and cattle producers will have access to a powerful new tool to protect cattle from these serious parasites, helping to safeguard the industry’s economic future and the nation’s beef supply.”

The conditional approval status reflects FDA’s determination that Exzolt Cattle-CA1 is safe for its labeled use and is reasonably expected to be effective, while requiring that its sponsor, Merck Animal Health, submit further data demonstrating its effectiveness over the next five years to support full approval.

Administration and Use Considerations

Exzolt Cattle-CA1 is a ready-to-use pour-on that delivers the active ingredient, fluralaner, to act systemically against infestations. Administration involves applying a narrow band of the solution from between the shoulder blades to the tailhead. It will be available in the first quarter of 2026 by prescription in 250 mL, 1 L or 5 L bottles.

After administration, there is a 98-day withdrawal period before slaughter to ensure meat from treated animals is free of drug residues. Use is prohibited in lactating dairy cattle, dairy calves, veal calves or bulls over one year of age that are intended for breeding.

This approval of Exzolt Cattle-CA1 complements that of Dectomax-CA1 , which was authorized in September 2025 for prevention and treatment of NWS infestations in cattle. Together, these two products give veterinarians and producers their first pharmacologic defenses against NWS.

‘Ultra-Processed Foods’ Needs a Better Definition, NPPC Says

Tue, 28 Oct 2025 16:49:30 GMT

The term “ultra-processed food” is a catch-all term that could unintentionally misclassify nutrient-dense foods simply because they are processed, the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) wrote in comments submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration ahead of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans release.

“If the Trump administration’s aim is to positively impact health, nutrition should be the focus – not processing,” NPPC said.

NPPC formally expressed its concerns regarding the FDA’s forthcoming definition of “ultra-processed foods,” which could be damaging for consumers of pork products.

“Pork products offer incredible nutritional value, yet they are at risk of being labeled as an “ultra-processed food,” while other foods that contain very little ingredients but lack nutritional value, may evade the classification,” NPPC wrote.

NPPC encouraged FDA to do the following:

Not classify food as ultra-processed simply because it does not fit into one of three categories (out of four) of the problematic NOVA classification system. Such a sorting focuses on the processing of foods rather than the nutritional benefits.
Not categorize food as ultra-processed that contains ingredients that enhance food safety, shelf stability, and nutrient availability. Such ingredients protect public health and allow nutrient dense foods to reach consumers.
Ensure an ultra-processed foods definition does not conflict with FDA’s Standards of Identity regulations, which detail what specific foods must contain, the amount or proportion of ingredients or components, and, sometimes, the method of production or formulation.

Because there is no consensus on what constitutes an “ultra-processed food,” NPPC said FDA should elevate the importance of nutritional composition while also protecting processing and ingredients that promote nutrient bioavailability, food safety and shelf stability.

Rather than “ultra-processed foods,” NPPC recommends the FDA use a term such as “discretionary foods” for food products characterized by lower nutritional quality, the release said.

“This would put the conversation back on nutrition as the basis for addressing diet-related chronic disease in America,” NPPC wrote.

5 Reasons Consumer Distrust In Our Food Supply Is Rising

Wed, 29 Jan 2025 14:13:15 GMT

Bread, check. Blueberries, check. As I wheel my grocery cart alongside the deli case, I’m taken aback at what I see. Rather, it is what I don’t see that has me wondering, “What in the world?” This section of my favorite grocery store is now almost completely empty, except for a couple of ham loaves and a renegade block of cheese.

In a slightly distraught tone I ask the worker behind the counter, “What’s going on?” He hesitates for a moment, then replies, “The store is in the process of changing suppliers for our deli products. We should have more of a selection next week.” Then it dawns on me: my favorite brand of deli meat and cheese, Boar’s Head, has officially been blacklisted by my go-to grocery store.

I should not have been surprised. Boar’s Head began its fall from public grace on July 26, 2024, when the company issued a recall for more than 207,528 lb. of product due to potential listeria contamination. The CDC linked the contamination to 61 illnesses and, tragically, 10 deaths. It was the worst listeria outbreak in the U.S. in over a decade.

The outbreak was ultimately traced to a production line at the company’s Jarratt, Va., plant. According to USDA inspection reports, which USA Today had to obtain through a Freedom of Information Act request, 69 reports of non-compliance were recorded at the Jarratt plant between 2023 and 2024. What was in those reports was unsettling. Documentation of insects live and dead, black and green mold, mildew, dripping and standing water, as well as other unsanitary conditions within the plant in the weeks leading up to the July recall. In a move that was too little too late, Boar’s Head announced on Sept. 13, 2024 that the Jarratt plant would be closed permanently.

In 1906, Upton Sinclair published his famous novel “The Jungle,” which exposed the horrific conditions in the meatpacking industry at the time. The writer’s work proved to be an instant bestseller to the masses. The irony is that nearly 120 years later, one might find it hard to discern whether they’re reading a current USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) report or a chapter straight out of “The Jungle.”

Just One Of Many
The Boar’s Head case was only one the high profile food recalls last year. Remember the E. coli contaminated onions on McDonald’s quarter pounders? Then, Costco issued a massive recall on their Kirkland Signature brand of organic eggs because of a threat of Salmonella. And to cap off the year with the scariest illness yet, on Dec. 18, 2024, the CDC confirmed a patient in Louisiana had been hospitalized with the nation’s first severe case of avian influenza A (H5N1) virus, aka the “bird flu.”

If it seems that the number of food recalls are coming at us at a more fast and furious pace than ever, then your gut instinct is spot on. The Food and Drug Administration, which reports food and cosmetics together, says 1,908 such products were recalled in the fiscal year that ended in September. That’s the highest number since 2019. Such a constant barrage of warnings is having a serious affect on consumers’ overall psyche — and not in a positive way. According to a September 2024 Gallup report, only 57% of Americans say they have a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence in the government to keep food safe. This number is a 27 point decrease since 2019, and is a record low for the Gallup Consumption Habits Poll since its inception in 1999.

This explosion of 20th century foodborne illnesses has me asking the same question I asked the worker behind the deli counter: “What’s going on?”

5 Reasons To Be Skeptical
There are multiple reasons consumers have good reason to be less confident in the safety of their food.

First, there’s the government. Second, more and more of our food is imported, which makes it harder to inspect. Third, you have a growing quest for more natural food, which sometimes circumvents traditional inspection channels. Fourth, industry consolidation means only a handful of players control both the production and processing. That’s not inherently a bad thing, but if something goes wrong, it’s probably going to be big. Finally, we now have the ability, through more technology and data, to find, detect and isolate the specific source of contamination and document it.

Time For An Overhaul
Food safety policy and implementation at the government level is in need of a serious overhaul. There is a chance it could actually happen. In 2018, the previous Trump administration proposed consolidating federal food oversight into a single agency with USDA.

There are so many common sense things that a fully functioning food agency could do. For one, start with better and more noticeable country of origin labeling (COOL) on imported foods. It should be prominent, displaying the country’s flag as the primary indicator of origin. If nothing else, we’ll all get better at geography. Next, companies that embrace new technologies that prevent contamination should be rewarded with tax credits. We do it for electric cars. Why not for safer food?

Finally, the most important change needs to come in the form of accountability and transparency both from the food industry itself and the government that regulates it. That didn’t happen in the case of Boar’s Head, and 10 people lost their lives because of it. In the age of AI and social media, those FSIS plant inspection reports should be posted on platforms such as X and Facebook for the public to see in real time. Without such transparency, we’re no better off than we were back in 1906.

FDA Proposes New Front-of-Package Food Labeling to Help Consumers Make Healthier Food Choices

Tue, 14 Jan 2025 18:17:48 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed a new front-of-package (FOP) labeling rule aimed at helping consumers make healthier food choices quickly and easily. This “Nutrition Info box,” a black-and-white design, will display levels of saturated fat, sodium, and added sugars, categorized as “Low,” “Med,” or “High,” along with the percent Daily Value for each nutrient.

Based on extensive research involving nearly 10,000 U.S. adults, this initiative seeks to complement the existing Nutrition Facts label and simplify decision-making for shoppers. If finalized, large manufacturers would have three years to comply, while smaller businesses (less than $10 million in annual food sales) would have four.

Example of Proposed Info Box

(FDA )

The FDA anticipates this measure will empower consumers, encourage healthier product formulations, and contribute to reducing chronic diseases like heart disease, diabetes, and obesity.

“For example, when comparing yogurt, the Nutrition Info box could help them identify a yogurt that is lower in added sugars,” said FDA in a statement.

Public comments on the proposal are open until May 16, 2025.

This new label is designed to complement the existing Nutrition Facts label found on the back of food packages, providing a more accessible and quick-reference guide for consumers.

FDA Commissioner Robert M. Califf, M.D., emphasized the importance of this proposal, stating, “It is time we make it easier for consumers to glance, grab and go. Adding front-of-package nutrition labeling to most packaged foods would do that.”

FDA also says that by displaying simplified, at-a-glance, nutrition information that details and interprets the saturated fat, sodium, and added sugar content of a food as “Low,” “Med,” or “High” on the front of food packages would provide consumers with an accessible description of the numerical information found in the Nutrition Facts label.

What are other examples of what the nutrition info boxes could look like? FDA provided the examples below.

Examples of nutrition box info.

(FDA)

FDA Releases Draft Guidance for Labeling Plant-Based Animal-Derived Foods

Tue, 07 Jan 2025 18:24:03 GMT

On Monday, Jan. 6, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a draft guidance on labeling plant-based foods that are marketed and sold as alternatives to conventional animal products and a public comment period is open.

“Because definitions and standards of identity have not been established for plant-based alternatives, these foods are non-standardized foods and must be labeled with their common or usual names, or in the absence thereof, a statement of identity that accurately describes the food,” according to the draft guidelines.

According to the FDA, consumer demand for plant-based alternatives to animal products including eggs, seafood, poultry, meat, and dairy has increased over time. The total U.S. retail plant-based food dollar sales grew from $5.5 billion in 2019 to $8.1 billion in 2023.

“Consumers should be able to easily see and determine the particular plant source when looking at the name of the food on the label,” the document says.

Currently there are no established guidelines for labeling plant-based alternative meat products and the draft of the guidelines aims to answer several questions including:

What should be included in the statement of identity for a plant-based alternative food that also includes the name of a food that has an established definition and standard of identity (e.g., “cheddar cheese”)?
What are important considerations when using “plant-based [animal derived food]” (e.g., “plant-based fish nuggets,” “plant-based sausage,” etc.) as part of the name for plant-based alternative foods?
How should plant-based alternative foods that are blends of different plant sources be labeled?
What are important considerations when using “[animal or meat]-free” or “non[animal or meat]” in the labeling of plant-based alternative foods?
What are important considerations when using a modified spelling, such as Chik’N, Be’f, Cheeze, as a name for plant-based alternative foods?
How should the statement of identity appear on the label?
What are important considerations when labeling plant-based alternative foods as “vegan” or “meat-free”?
Can vignettes or other statements be used to convey characterizing flavors?

Public comments are being accepted through May 5, 2025. Use this link to review document and comment.

Your next read: GOP to Propose ‘Biggest Bill in American History'; Includes Tax Cuts, Deregulation and Border Security

FDA Plans Five-Year Blueprint for Antimicrobial Stewardship

Thu, 13 Jun 2024 00:12:08 GMT

FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., issued the following statement on efforts to advance antimicrobial stewardship in veterinary settings.

Antimicrobial resistance is a global public health challenge. Antimicrobial drugs have been widely used in human and veterinary medicine for more than 60 years. When used judiciously, antimicrobials can effectively fight bacterial infections. However, we know that overuse or misuse of these drugs promotes the development of antimicrobial-resistant bacteria.

For all of these reasons, it’s critical that we implement good antimicrobial stewardship practices in human healthcare and veterinary settings. We must continue to take new steps to slow the development of resistance and extend the usefulness of these lifesaving drugs.

Combating antimicrobial resistance continues to be a top priority for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

To further these efforts, the FDA will soon implement a new, five-year blueprint for how the FDA plans to build on its current programs to advance antimicrobial stewardship in veterinary settings. We’ll expand on the FDA’s existing actions, and launch some new programs. Our aim is to reduce overuse of antimicrobial drugs and combat the rising threat of resistance.

As part of the FDA’s regulatory mission, our Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) is responsible for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of animal drugs, including antimicrobials. CVM has already taken important steps to update the approved conditions of use for medically important antimicrobials (i.e., antimicrobials important for treating human disease) to support judicious use in food-producing animals. While important progress has been made, we know that additional work is needed to address the complex challenge of antimicrobial resistance.

At FDA, we believe that the concept of antimicrobial stewardship encompasses several important principles of judicious use. These are critical to slowing the rate at which bacteria develop resistance to antimicrobial drugs. In simple terms, we believe medically important antimicrobial drugs should only be used when necessary to treat, control or prevent disease. In addition, when such use is necessary, these antimicrobials should be used in an optimal manner. They should only be used under the oversight of a licensed veterinarian.

Among the steps that CVM has already taken, perhaps the most significant action was implementation of Guidance for Industry #213 . On Jan. 3, 2017, the FDA announced that it had completed implementation of GFI #213. This was the culmination of a process launched in 2013. The goal was to transition medically important antimicrobials that are used in the feed or drinking water of food-producing animals to veterinary oversight, and to eliminate the use of these products in animals for production purposes, such as for growth promotion.

Of the 292 new animal drug applications initially affected by GFI #213, 84 were completely withdrawn. Of the remaining 208 applications, 93 applications for oral dosage form products intended for use in water were converted from over-the-counter to prescription status; while another 115 applications for products intended for use in feed were converted from over-the-counter to veterinary feed directive status. Moreover, production indications (e.g., growth promotion) were withdrawn from all 31 applications that included such indications for use.

Last year, we also published a paper proposing the use of a biomass denominator to adjust annual data on the amount of antimicrobials sold or distributed for use in food-producing animals in the U.S. This adjusted estimate is intended to provide more insight into broad shifts in the amount of antimicrobials sold for use in food-producing animals and give the FDA a more nuanced view of why sales increase or decrease over time in a manner that is specific to U.S. animal production. The agency also recently launched the Resistome Tracker. This is an interactive research and data visualization tool for antibiotic resistance genes.

To build on the progress already made, we’re announcing that the FDA will shortly publish a blueprint on how we’ll press forward and implement additional steps to address antimicrobial resistance in veterinary settings. This blueprint will serve as the FDA’s new, five-year plan. We’ll include key goals, objectives and actions that CVM will focus on during fiscal years 2019 – 2023.

Our new activities will be aimed at addressing three key goals:

Aligning antimicrobial drug product use with the principles of antimicrobial stewardship; supporting efforts to foster better stewardship of antimicrobials in veterinary settings; and enhancing the monitoring of antimicrobial resistance and antimicrobial drug use in animals.

The specific objectives and actions will be outlined in our forthcoming plan.

Some of the important issues to be addressed in this new plan include establishing appropriate durations of use of medically important antimicrobials, and bringing all dosage forms of medically important antimicrobials under veterinary oversight. We are also developing and advancing new strategies for promoting antimicrobial stewardship in companion animals.

We’ll advance these goals in new guidance that the FDA will develop with broad stakeholder input. And we’ll enhance transparency and keep the public apprised of progress being made.

For example, we’ll shortly publish a list of all medically important antimicrobials labeled for use in animals that lack a defined duration of use on their labels. We’ll keep this list updated as we work to implement a science-based approach for addressing this important issue.

We’re also advancing new strategies to improve the collection and sharing of data on antimicrobial drug use and resistance. To advance evidence-based practices, we need to make sure that the entire community has access to good information. And we need to develop a long-term strategy for implementing a practical, efficient antimicrobial use monitoring and reporting system for veterinary settings. Our plan will address new ways to advance these goals.

Many stakeholders helped make our previous efforts a success. These include the animal pharmaceutical and feed industry; veterinary organizations; animal producer organizations; consumer organizations; various local, state and federal agencies; legislators; and other key stakeholders.

I look forward to releasing this plan shortly, and continuing to work collaboratively to promote stewardship and preserve the effectiveness of antimicrobials for human and animal health.

FDA Looks to Consolidate its Food Policy and Regulation Divisions

Wed, 01 Feb 2023 17:28:32 GMT

FDA wants to consolidate its food policy and regulation divisions in the wake of last year’s national baby-formula shortage. The agency was criticized for its slow response and other food safety concerns, as supply chain issues and a formula recall panicked parents and caregivers.

Abbott Laboratories, which makes Similac and other brands, halted production at its Sturgis, Mich., factory because of product safety concerns.

Read more: FDA Approves Lab-Grown Chicken for the First Time

“Today, I am announcing a new, transformative vision for the FDA Human Foods Program,” said Commissioner Robert Califf. “Creating a Human Foods Program under a single leader who reports directly to the Commissioner unifies and elevates the program while removing redundancies, enabling the agency to oversee human food in a more effective and efficient way.”

The revamped foods program would absorb the functions of Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and the Office of Food Policy and Response, as well as some of the work of the Office of Regulatory Affairs.

How it Works

The Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) would continue as a separate office; “the relevant food safety activities will be closely coordinated” between the CVM director and the deputy commissioner for human foods, said Califf.

Read more: Conagra Recalls 2.5 Million Pounds of Canned Meat and Poultry Product

Under Califf’s proposal, the deputy commissioner for food “will have decision-making authority over policy, strategy and regulatory program activities within the Human Foods Program, as well as resource allocation and risk prioritization.”

An advisory committee of outside experts would look at “challenging and emerging issues in food safety, nutrition and innovative food technologies.”

Principal deputy commissioner Janet Woodcock said an “implementation and change” group of FDA managers already was laying the groundwork to make the reorganization a reality. “We look forward to sharing further details next month and in the future on our progress,” she said.

The deputy commissioner will be named by spring, Califf told the Associated Press.

FDA Approves Lab-Grown Chicken for the First Time

Fri, 18 Nov 2022 20:57:22 GMT

The FDA approved lab-grown chicken for the first time, greenlighting products from startup Upside Foods for human consumption. If Upside gets USDA approval next, the company said it could start pumping out 50,000 pounds of “no-kill” meat products every year.

The news follows Upside’s April announcement that it had secured $400 million in Series C funding, moving the company “from R&D to commercialization,” according to CEO Uma Valeti.

“Our team...continues to overcome seemingly insurmountable challenges in our mission to make our favorite food a force for good,” said Valeti.

Upside, with 140 employees, has now garnered over $600 million in funding from names like Bill Gates and meat companies Tyson and Cargill.

Brian Sikes, Cargill COO, stresses his team’s commitment to meatless meat:

“Our continued support for UPSIDE’s innovative work underscores Cargill’s commitment to an inclusive approach to wholesome, sustainable protein that will meet customer and consumer needs now and in the future.”

Meanwhile, Beyond Meat announced it would lay off 19% of staff last month, and retail sales in the plant-based meat industry overall have dropped 10% in the past year.

More on lab-grown meat :

Beyond Meat Faces Lawsuit Over False Protein Content and Quality Claims
Hoxton Farms Raises $22 Million for Cultivated Animal Fat

FDA Approves First Mycotoxin Degrading Ingredient

Wed, 05 Oct 2022 18:44:12 GMT

The importance of feeding quality grain is more important than ever as feed costs continue to impact pork producer’s bottom line.

“With high corn prices and all input costs being up, you really want to get the most out of those nutrients that you’re paying for,” says Paige Gott, mycotoxin and Hy-D category manager for DSM. “We know mycotoxins can limit that.”

Mycotoxins are secondary metabolites produced by certain molds which can contaminate a wide range of feed ingredients. When ingested, mycotoxins can be detrimental to the health, reproduction and performance of animals.

Even low-level mycotoxin exposure can have a negative effect on pig performance as swine is one of the species most sensitive to these fungal metabolites. From reduced feed intake and diarrhea to infertility and impaired immune function, mycotoxins can evoke both subclinical and clinical effects in pigs.

“We often relate fumonisins to pulmonary edema, which can cause high mortality on the farm, and even at low levels, fumonisins can cause immune suppression. We don’t really measure immune suppression on the farm, but it can cause the health challenges like PRRS, PED, or E. coli to worsen,” says Lan Zheng, technical services manager for DSM. “We may think it’s biosecurity or transportation issues, but we don’t really connect that back to fumonisins. It can be a silent mycotoxin, but if we can address that before those clinical signs happen, that can save a lot of money for the producers.”

Survey Shows High Levels of B-Trich, Fumonisins

In a recent 2021 U.S. corn crop survey by DSM of 274 corn samples and 46 corn distiller’s dried grains with solubles (DDGS) collected from 23 states, six major mycotoxin groups were identified, Gott explains.

“We’re seeing higher occurrence of some of the metabolites that we see year to year. So most frequently occurring would be the type B trichothecenes (B-Trich), which would be the family that includes deoxynivalenol or ‘vomitoxin’ that most people are familiar with. Next, we have fumonisins with 63% of the samples in our data set being positive for fumonisins. And then zearalenone would be the next most frequently occurring mycotoxin group that we see in over 27% of samples,” Gott says.

Occurrences are up from last year, but the contamination levels are pretty consistent this year versus last year, Gott says.

FDA Approves New Tool To Mitigate Mycotoxins

DSM announced on June 9 that fumonisin esterase, DSM’s enzyme for the degradation of fumonisins present in swine feed, is the first product to be approved for degrading fumonisins in feed in the U.S. market.

DSM received confirmation from FDA CVM on June 8 of the completion of their regulatory review that found that the data support the safety and functionality of fumonisin esterase, the first mycotoxin degrading ingredient to go through FDA’s Food Additive Petition (FAP) process.

More information will be available soon about product release and availability.

“It is really groundbreaking in the United States to have a product that we’ll be able to claim that type of mode of action related to mycotoxins is exciting,” Gott says. “The label claim will be able to make official claim related to mycotoxins specifically fumonisins in swine feed. As of right now, products are labeled for other uses since mycotoxin mitigation is not formally recognized as an option.”