Food & Farming · Sunday, 16 August 2026
01 · Briefing · what happened
Washington closes a 1958 food-additive loophole, and still cannot define ultra-processed
A 1958 rule let companies vouch for their own additives. The FDA moved to close it - and again skipped the harder question.
99%
of new food chemicals since 2000
entered via the self-certification route
13,000+
cyclospora cases confirmed
one of the largest US outbreaks on record
22%
drop in FDA staff
this year against 2024
51.9m
tonnes of EU maize forecast
lowest since 2007, and analysts see worse
At a glance
- The FDA proposed making ingredient notification mandatory, closing a loophole open since 1958.
- Until now companies could declare their own additives safe and start selling without telling anyone.
- Nearly 99 percent of food chemicals added since 2000 came in through that loophole.
- For the second time this year, Washington postponed defining what ultra-processed food actually is.
- It arrived mid-crisis: cyclospora cases past 13,000, plus a highest-risk recall of 19 million eggs.
- The FDA has 22 percent fewer staff than in 2024 while produce imports keep rising.
- Separately, heat has hit Europe's maize crop hardest since the 1970s, and a record El Nino is building.
Forces in play
a record outbreak and public anger over additives have pushed food rules up the agenda
FDA staff down 22 percent since 2024 and foreign inspections down 13 percent, while imports grow
companies still write their own safety science; the new rule adds paperwork, not an independent review
French maize may halve to its smallest since 1976 and England faces its worst cereal harvest on record
US grocery prices actually fell in July and UK food inflation hit a near two-year low of 1.7 percent
How it unfolded
- 1958 Congress writes a safe-ingredient exemption meant for things like salt and paprika
- April the promised ultra-processed definition slips; officials say it is really hard
- Mon 10 Aug the FDA proposes mandatory notification for all new ingredients
- Wed 12 Aug the egg recall is raised to Class I, the highest risk grade
- Fri 14 Aug analysts warn French maize could halve to its smallest crop since 1976
Where this points
The rule now goes to public comment, so watch whether the final version adds an independent review before an ingredient reaches shelves - without one, the paperwork changes and the incentive does not.
Full briefing
The US Food and Drug Administration proposed a rule on Monday that would force food companies to tell it about every new ingredient they put on the market
What the rule does
The gap is called GRAS, short for Generally Recognized As Safe. Since 1958 a company has been able to decide for itself that an ingredient is safe and start selling it, without telling the government or showing anyone its evidence
“If finalized, this rule would formally transition the GRAS framework from a voluntary program to a mandatory notification system,” acting FDA commissioner Kyle Diamantas said
Consumer groups called it a start and not much more. There is still no independent safety review before an ingredient reaches a shelf, and no plan for re-examining the substances already in the food supply
Lawyers are not certain the agency can even do this. A 2021 court ruling said the FDA could run a voluntary system; a mandatory one is a different question
The definition that keeps slipping
Robert F Kennedy Jr, the health secretary, promised a federal definition of ultra-processed food “by April”
The delay is not only politics. There is no scientific consensus on what counts as ultra-processed, and it has been hard to establish which health effects follow from processing itself
The outbreak underneath it all
The rule landed in the middle of one of the largest foodborne illness episodes in US history. Confirmed cyclospora cases, traced to iceberg lettuce, have passed 13,000
A separate salmonella outbreak forced Taylor Farms, a seven-billion-dollar supplier, to recall its jalapeno products
The FDA says the lettuce is off the market and told Americans to keep eating salad
Europe’s harvest is the week’s other story
Heat and drought have wrecked the European maize crop. The European Commission has already cut its 2026/27 forecast to 51.9 million tonnes, the lowest since 2007. Some analysts now expect under 50 million for the first time since the 1990s
Austria, a water-rich country, expects a grain harvest 19 percent smaller and is seeing emergency slaughter as Alpine pastures dry out and cattle come down early
The damage shows up in the food itself. Cauliflowers are coming out yellow instead of white, cucumbers misshapen, broccoli undersized, and Britain is importing more vegetables than usual to fill the gap
What is loading next
El Nino, the Pacific warming that reshuffles weather worldwide, is running early and looks set to be the strongest in nearly 80 years of records
For Latin America it cuts both ways. More rain usually helps crops in Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay and southern Brazil - but the Panama Canal is already cutting how deep ships can sit, which squeezes cargo
The Black Sea is the other pressure. Ukraine supplies half the world’s sunflower oil, 16 percent of traded corn and 12 percent of traded wheat
Prices, plants and policy
None of it has reached the till yet. US consumer prices rose 3.4 percent in the year to July, and grocery prices actually fell - lettuce alone dropped more than 16 percent as shoppers avoided it
American corn looks fine. USDA’s 12 August report put Iowa on 216 bushels an acre, up from 210
In Congress, the 2026 Farm Bill failed to clear the Senate Agriculture Committee, deadlocked over shifting food-aid costs to states
And the machinery upstream keeps narrowing. USDA figures show two companies control more than 70 percent of US corn and soybean seed sales, and the top four cottonseed firms nearly 94 percent
Furthest from the headlines, in Somalia, funding for acute malnutrition has fallen more than 80 percent this year. One in four children screened in south-western displacement camps is severely malnourished, and donor money has dropped to roughly 300 million dollars from 2.2 billion in 2022
02 · Lesson · why it matters
Why nobody can define good food
Yield and nourishment are two different numbers, and we only ever built the machinery to count one of them.
How it works
- A crop is graded and paid for by weight
- So breeding and fertiliser push mass hard
- The plant draws more minerals, but far more slowly than it gains bulk
- Same nutrients, spread through more food
- Per kilo, nourishment drifts down while tonnes climb
- Nothing on the grading sheet ever notices
The twist
How much food there is and how much good it does are two different numbers, and we only ever built the machinery to count the first one.
Where you've seen this
Exam results
schools are measured on scores, so scores rise faster than the learning underneath
Hospital waiting lists
counting how fast patients are seen tells you nothing about whether they got better
Timber
fast-grown trees hit height targets years early and give softer, weaker wood
The catch
The size of the historical decline in specific crops is genuinely disputed - old and new varieties were measured in different soils, in different years, by different methods.
Full lesson
The question the rule does not ask
A senior official at America’s food regulator said, in public, that defining ultra-processed food “is really hard.”
He was not dodging. It is hard, and for a stranger reason than the politics around it.
The new rule asks a question the system already knows how to answer: is this ingredient safe? That question has a method. You take a substance, you test it, you look for harm.
The question nobody can answer is the other one. Does this food nourish a person? There is no agreed measure. No test, no threshold, no number on any form. So a rule about food ends up being a rule about paperwork on chemicals, because that is the part we know how to weigh.
The same hole runs back to the field
Follow that gap upstream and you reach the farm, where the miss is a century old.
A crop is graded and paid for by weight. Tonnes per hectare, bushels per acre, moisture, test weight. Those numbers decide what a farmer earns and therefore what a breeder breeds for. Minerals per gram appear on no grading sheet anywhere in the chain.
So for a hundred years, plant breeding pushed hard on the thing that was measured. It worked, spectacularly. Yields on the major grains rose several times over and fed billions of people who would otherwise not have eaten. That is not a small thing and it should not be waved away.
But a second number was moving the whole time, and nothing was watching it.
Dilution, not disappearance
The mechanism is simple enough to hold in your head.
A plant pulls minerals out of the soil. Zinc, iron, magnesium. How much it can pull is limited by what is in the soil and how well the roots reach it. Breeding and fertiliser are very good at making the plant build more bulk - more starch, more water, more grain. They are much less good at making it pull proportionally more mineral.
So the same quantity of mineral ends up spread through more food. The grain is not poisoned and nothing has vanished. It is diluted. A kilo of it carries less than a kilo used to.
Rising carbon dioxide appears to push in the same direction. In controlled experiments, plants grown in air with more of it build more carbohydrate and end up with lower mineral concentrations. How much that matters in a real field, with real weather and real soil, is still argued over.
The visible version of this showed up in England this summer. Drought produced undersized broccoli and yellow cauliflowers - food that looks wrong. The dilution version looks completely normal. That is the whole problem with it.
What is settled and what is not
This is a field with real disagreement, and it is worth being precise about where the line falls.
Settled: hidden hunger is real, measured, and widespread. Millions of people eat enough calories and are still short of iron, zinc or vitamin A. Settled: fortification works. Iodised salt and folic acid in flour are among the cheapest public health wins ever recorded.
Not settled: the size of the historical decline in any particular crop. Those studies compare old varieties to new ones, but they were grown in different soils, in different years, and measured with different laboratory methods. Careful people have criticised them on exactly those grounds. Not settled either: how big the carbon dioxide effect will be outside a chamber.
What is not in dispute is the shape of the thing. Yield and density are separate quantities, and only one of them was ever on the sheet.
Why growing more does not fix it
This is the part that catches people out.
If the shortfall is per gram, then producing more grams does not close it. A person eats a certain number of meals. If each one carries less, more tonnes in a silo somewhere does not reach them. That is precisely why fortification and biofortification exist as separate efforts, run by separate people, funded separately from anything to do with raising yields. They are the patch for a gap that abundance does not fill.
The arrangement underneath all this is a grading sheet - a rule about what gets counted and paid for. It looks like plain fact. It is a choice somebody made, and it has narrowed since: two companies now control more than 70 percent of American corn and soybean seed. The people writing the priorities are fewer than they were.
The measure nobody took
Nobody set out to grow emptier food. They set out to grow more of it, honestly, using the only number they had, and it worked well enough to end famines that had run for centuries.
The cost sat in a column that did not exist. It reached everyone who eats - the shopper picking up a bag of flour, the child in a camp screened for malnutrition, the person reading this. None of us chose it. None of us can see it from where we stand either, because the sheet in front of every one of us still has only the one number on it.
Which raises the harder thought. Not what is wrong with the numbers we keep. What is moving right now in the column nobody thought to add.
03 · Lab · your turn
Breed the Crop
Spend five seasons of breeding effort and watch tonnes and nourishment-per-kilo move apart.
04 · Hope · carry this
Nothing here was hidden, only uncounted - and a column can always be added. We put iodine in salt and folic acid in flour once we thought to look.
More from Food & Farming