Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government United States

US Food and Drug Administration Rejects Petition To Set PFAS Limits In Food (theguardian.com) 127

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: The US Food and Drug Administration has rejected a legal petition demanding it set limits on toxic Pfas "forever chemicals" in food, marking another setback for public health advocates' push to limit exposures to the dangerous compounds. The agency is refusing to set limits despite a growing body of science and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finding food is the biggest source of Pfas exposure. Testing has found the levels of Pfas in single servings of some contaminated foods to be equivalent to drinking many glasses of contaminated water.

While regulators have focused on reining in Pfas in water, the chemicals are widely used throughout the food system, and there was hope that the agency under Robert F Kennedy Jr would take the threat more seriously. Kennedy leads the "make America healthy again" (Maha) movement, of which eliminating toxic chemicals from food is a cornerstone. [...] The November 2023 petition called on the FDA to check for up to 30 Pfas compounds in a range of produce, fish, eggs, milk and bread. The agency did not respond within the six-month timeframe required by law, but TEJTF scaled back its petition in 2025 to ask the agency to set advisory thresholds for PFOA and Pfos, two of the most common and dangerous Pfas compounds, in seafood and milk.

Recent FDA testing found 70% of seafood samples contain the chemicals, while independent milk testing found it in 12% of 50 samples, including extremely high levels in Whole Foods and Kirkland Signature brands. The FDA rejected the revised petition, stating it plans to take action on setting standards for Pfas, and there is "insufficient evidence to support [TEJTF's] request." The agency said it plans to set less non-binding "action levels" that do not require contaminated food to be removed from shelves. "Tolerance levels," or limits, make it illegal to sell food contaminated beyond a set threshold.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Food and Drug Administration Rejects Petition To Set PFAS Limits In Food

Comments Filter:
  • by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @12:14AM (#66229404) Journal

    here was hope that the agency under Robert F Kennedy Jr would take the threat more seriously.

    There is only one hope that is ever truly justified in Robert F Kennedy, and that is he will do something unexpected at a cocain/heroin party.

    With a bit of PCP he's the perfect match for the Trump administration.

    • by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @09:07AM (#66229824)

      here was hope that the agency under Robert F Kennedy Jr would take the threat more seriously.

      There is only one hope that is ever truly justified in Robert F Kennedy, and that is he will do something unexpected at a cocain/heroin party. With a bit of PCP he's the perfect match for the Trump administration.

      Weird that you were modded as troll. What you wrote was not only funny, but likely true. I always thought his presence was to make the rest of this administration look normal.

      • It would be weird on a site without so many reich wing maggot cucks.

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 )

          It would be weird on a site without so many reich wing maggot cucks.

          How do you know he enjoys watching his wife have sex with other men? Or is that just projection?

          • How do you know he enjoys watching his wife have sex with other men?

            They actually just enjoy watching the country they claim to love get fucked.

            • How do you know he enjoys watching his wife have sex with other men?

              They actually just enjoy watching the country they claim to love get fucked.

              Even in the darkest of times, humans can find humor no matter the source. You ave evolved into permanent desperate ennui. How's that workin' out for ya?

  • Land of the free ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @12:39AM (#66229442)

    ... free to poison people for profit, that is. Entirely what I expected in this question.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by thegarbz ( 1787294 )

      In other news, Trump is wondering why the EU doesn't import safe and amazing, some say its the best, I don't say that, but it sounds good, grown man saying that can you imagine, American food. Clearly we need to slap tarifs on them for taking advantage of America.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        True. Except for some wines, peanuts and almonds, I cannot think of a single US food product I could easily get here.

        • True. Except for some wines, peanuts and almonds, I cannot think of a single US food product I could easily get here.

          How do you survive without Doritos, Pringles, and Twinkies?

          • by cmseagle ( 1195671 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @09:16AM (#66229846)

            True. Except for some wines, peanuts and almonds, I cannot think of a single US food product I could easily get here.

            How do you survive without Doritos, Pringles, and Twinkies?

            Serious response to a jokey question: they don't. You can buy Doritos and Pringles in pretty much any European country. They're manufactured locally with recipes tweaked to meet EU requirements and local palates. I've had both the American and the European version of both and couldn't tell the difference (though I'll admit that I'm not a snack food connoisseur).

            Twinkies are trickier. I believe the only places they're commonly available are the UK and Ireland.

            • by gweihir ( 88907 )

              I have never seen Doritos here. Pringles, yes, but the ones here are not US made, I believe. (Do not have one handy to check...) There are several local brands with similar but better products though. The only reason I know what a Twinkie is was watching Wall-E.

              • I have never seen Doritos here.

                Where is "here"? I've seen Doritos on the store shelves of local supermarkets in basically every country in Europe. And if you're going to say the UK, well the UK has it's own Doritos factory.

          • How do you survive without Doritos, Pringles, and Twinkies?

            We don't need to. They aren't imported into Europe. Doritos are made in Belgium. Pringles in Belgium and Poland. And we have plenty of Twinks running around the street in Amsterdam dressed in little tiny short shorts.

            • And we have plenty of Twinks running around the street in Amsterdam dressed in little tiny short shorts.

              I always thought it was kind of ironic that a twink with a fondness for twinkies would soon cease to be a twink.

              As for the snack cakes themselves, I'd actually never gotten around to trying them until after they were discontinued and then brought back sometime in mid 2013. They were completely unremarkable and tasted just like every other crappy snack cake. To anyone who hasn't tried these sort of American "delicacies", they're shelf-stable plastic-wrapped miniature cakes which all to varying degrees mana

              • Hahhaah that part was facetious. Twinkies are the one thing I've not commonly seen in Europe. We can get them though at expat import stores. Along with Hershie bars and a reminder that even American chocolate tastes like crap. (Sidenote: Not everything American tastes crap, Europe has a lot to learn about BBQing, though you can keep your mac and cheese side dish, no idea why anyone thought that's a good side for a steak. Definitely making pulled pork burgers Louisiana style this weekend though).

        • How many Starbucks and McDonalds have you gone past today?
          • How many Starbucks and McDonalds have you gone past today?

            Literally none of Starbucks or McDonalds is American food. The former sources its products food from Latin America (even in the USA), and the latter infamously uses local products to produce locally adjusted food menu. How many McDonalds around you serve a Tikki burger, or a Maharaj burger like in India? Do you fries come with tomato sauce or Friet sauce like in the Netherlands to go with your McKroket, or a Big Rösti in Germany?

            You know what they call a Quarter pounder in Amsterdam? - This isn't real

          • by gweihir ( 88907 )

            Zero. If I wen to the city center, I would probably walk by more sushi-places than McDonalds (and this is a land-locked country). I think there is a McDonalds somewhere, but I am not sure where. Same for Starbucks.

            • So you do at least know they are there. There are thousands of each strewn across Europe, earning billions feeding Europeans with American food.

              You're Swiss, right? There are about 200 McDonalds in Switzerland, and growing. A fraction of the number in France, Germany or the UK. And it's nowhere near being one of the best places we have to eat. It's the lowest common denominator of fast food.

              You should just come visit the US. You'll love the food, everyone does.

              • There are thousands of each strewn across Europe, earning billions feeding Europeans with American food.

                You misspelled European food. There's no American ingredients and no American staff used to make any of that food. Also try and find an American McDonalds that serves a McRaclette like they do in Switzerland.

              • by gweihir ( 88907 )

                You should just come visit the US. You'll love the food, everyone does.

                I have been to the US for about 3 months total on several different visits. I got food poisoning exactly 3 times in my life, one my own kitchen mistake and two times from restaurant food in the US. And I have been to Africa with zero problems of that nature.

                Hence I really hope you were being sarcastic there.

    • by nightflameauto ( 6607976 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @08:47AM (#66229794)

      ... free to poison people for profit, that is. Entirely what I expected in this question.

      Profit is, after all, the only guiding light this society has. The poison part doesn't even register as something worth considering. Nothing else does either. Greed is God. Profit is both ethics and morality boiled down to their only essence. Anything that stands against God (Greed) or our moral framework (Profit), must be ignored. If it dares to continue to be an issue, it must be dealt with harshly.

      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Indeed. I am tempted to say this is worse than Fascism, because at least fascists believe in something greater than themselves.

  • by DrMrLordX ( 559371 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @12:43AM (#66229452)

    It might be more productive to have third party labs document PFAS contamination of foods and then file a class action suit over the contamination.

    • by Waffle Iron ( 339739 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @01:44AM (#66229496)

      It might be more productive to have third party labs document PFAS contamination of foods and then file a class action suit over the contamination.

      Sorry. When you signed up for that discount card a few years ago, you agreed to individual binding arbitration only.

      • Sorry. When you signed up for that discount card a few years ago, you agreed to individual binding arbitration only.

        This always seems like a great idea for companies... until someone is motivated to organize thousands of individuals to file for arbitration. The company has to pay the arbitration fees for every single one of them. It adds up fast. A class action settlement is usually cheaper.

        • They've already dealt with this. If you read the fine print on these agreements, many or most of the recent ones say that the company has the option of rolling up any "substantially similar" arbitration cases into a single mass arbitration. (Which as usual, is decided by a person whose paycheck ultimately depends on the business of that same company.)

    • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @04:16AM (#66229594)

      Would it be? How well has that worked for Monsanto victims who actually have a terminal illness? The supreme court has ruled regulations trump lawsuits in that case, and the FDA specifically saying they won't impose limits sort of falls into that category right?

      • As I recall, that was more, "Science trumps the opinions of a California jury".
        • As I recall, that was more, "Science trumps the opinions of a California jury".

          No you're thinking of a different case. The ruling was very clear, that pesticides are regulated by a federal administration and that in producing a product in accord with that regulation the states couldn't bring a lawsuit as they don't have standing.

          The science itself is very clear, which is precisely why Monsanto changed their formula for consumers in the first place, and why Europe banned the substance in question long ago even for commercial farmers. Roundup ain't your granddaddy's roundup anymore.

      • It still cost Monsanto a lot of money. Which is where this kind of thing starts off. Once enough judgments are handed down against the company, that's when regulations follow.

        • It still cost Monsanto a lot of money. Which is where this kind of thing starts off. Once enough judgments are handed down against the company, that's when regulations follow.

          What's the goal here? Just paying a bit of money, enacting change, or making people whole? I'd argue costing a bit of money is irrelevant compared to the last two which very objectively have not been achieved through a legal system, and *ONLY* been achieved (partially anyway) through regulation, and even then a significant amount of that came from regulation abroad.

  • The only good Kennedy is a dead Kennedy.

  • by D,Petkow ( 793457 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @12:52AM (#66229470)
    Some of macho Hamacho s achievements so far, most of which are borderline legal at best. It is a big club, but you ain’t in it:
    Jan. 20, 2025 – Withdrew the U.S. from the Paris Climate Agreement (again). Criticism: Undermines U.S. climate leadership and slows emissions reductions.
    2025 – Large-scale federal workforce reductions and agency restructuring. Criticism: Reduced expertise and capacity in public health, science, and environmental enforcement.
    July 2025 – Exempted more than 100 industrial facilities from certain pollution-control requirements. Criticism: Could increase exposure to carcinogens and toxic pollutants for nearby communities.
    Feb. 5, 2026 – EPA enforcement against polluters fell to a record low. Criticism: Environmental groups argue it weakens accountability and encourages noncompliance.
    Feb. 18, 2026 – Administration moved to revoke the legal basis for major U.S. climate regulations. Criticism: Seen as an attempt to dismantle decades of environmental protections.
    March 2026 – Executive actions and policy shifts favoring continued glyphosate use and limiting some pesticide liability. Criticism: Public-health advocates argue they prioritize chemical manufacturers over health concerns.
    May 19, 2026 – EPA proposed rolling back drinking-water limits for several PFAS ("forever chemicals"). Criticism: Critics say it exposes millions to higher levels of persistent toxic chemicals.
    May 2026 – IRS settlement reportedly shielding many of Trump's, his family's, and affiliated businesses' pre-settlement tax returns from future audits. Criticism: Tax experts called it unprecedented and argued it creates unequal treatment under tax law. (Reuters/AP reporting.)
    June 2026 – Continued approvals and support for certain PFAS-related pesticide uses. Criticism: Environmental groups argue this increases long-term contamination risks despite health concerns.
    July 8, 2026 – FDA rejected a petition to set enforceable PFAS limits in food. Criticism: Public-health advocates argue the decision leaves consumers inadequately protected from "forever chemicals."
    This list says plenty alone.
  • by BrendaEM ( 871664 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @12:59AM (#66229476) Homepage
    Trump seemed to have helped 1 million Americans dies from COVID. Why wouldn't he want more to die from cancer?
  • by yanestra ( 526590 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @02:13AM (#66229524) Journal
    It's healthy for Americans, while for the rest of the world (with less stable intestines) it's toxic. FDA and JFKjr want your best, proven by the Orange Seal.
    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      That must be it. Us weak-ass Europeans just cannot deal with PFAS chemicals. We also cannot manage dying earlier (https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/), which creates a host of problems, same as our overpowered and far too affordable health-care systems.

      • by Targon ( 17348 )

        If you lived in the USA, you would WANT to die sooner. Getting older and seeing what these politicians are doing to this country makes me not want to live longer and see more deterioration.

    • by Quantum gravity ( 2576857 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @04:40AM (#66229620)
      In studies on mammals, effects on the liver, immune system and reproduction are common.
      They are long-lived and therefore remain in the environment for a long time and are therefore spread far, via air and water.
      This makes them a global problem, including Antarctica.
  • then those idiots will cry about the EU banning US produced shit "food"

  • by euid0 ( 6666616 )
    EU started limiting this stuff 4 years ago. Why so much reluctance in the US to introduce something which is clearly in the population's interest ? https://www.food-safety.com/ar... [food-safety.com]
    • Re:EU (Score:4, Insightful)

      by ArchieBunker ( 132337 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @08:07AM (#66229760)

      MAGA logic dictates that anything not done by MAGA is automatically bad.

    • Here's a link to the FDA's response, which boils down to, "we're already working on it, here's what we plan to do and here's what we've already done". https://www.regulations.gov/do... [regulations.gov]

      The Guardian could have included more of the response than just a link, but they're very bad at journalism. In that they decided to stop doing it all together and focus on political narratives instead.

    • by Targon ( 17348 )

      Don't try to understand why Republicans do the things they do, because the more you know, the less you want to know.

    • by cpurdy ( 4838085 )

      EU started limiting this stuff 4 years ago. Why so much reluctance in the US to introduce something which is clearly in the population's interest ?

      The current shitler administration does not work for Americans. It works solely to enrich shitler. Once you understand that, everything starts to make sense.

  • ... americans are cooked. Poison in your food is legal.

    • Don't just take The Guardian's word on it. They neglected to discuss the FDA's response, which boiled down to, "Yeah, we know, we're working on it already. Here's a few pages on what we've been doing so far, what we plan to do, and why it's important that we do it."
  • Don't worry (Score:5, Funny)

    by The-Ixian ( 168184 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @08:40AM (#66229786)

    Unpasteurized milk and skipping vaccinations will solve the problem

    • Clever. Can't die from answer if you're already dead. *tappingheadthroughfully.gif*

      • WTF "answer"? PFAS! God I need to go to bed. Don't slashdot drunk and tired while multitasking at work boys. Time to drive home.

  • Ummm (Score:5, Informative)

    by Ol Olsoc ( 1175323 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @09:04AM (#66229822)
    Kennedy? You expect help from him? MAHA

    There is another piece of idiocy. "Make America Healthy Again? Yeah Not that health issues are an America thing, but MAHA must be returning to everyone smoking again, Drinking Radium Water along with putting it in food. Having children's feet X-ray Fluoroscoped to fit them with shoes, Mercury treatments, cocaine for kids for teething, Arsenic and lead in medicines, Lead in gasoline, tapeworms for weight control. Purposely getting Malaria to treat STD's. Arsenic in Wallpaper, Arsenic as an Insecticide, and on and on.

    Sorry, but MAHA is merely insanity. If America (or the rest of the world) was somehow healthier at one time, we need to return to all those things that were provably killing us.

    • 100,000,00 Guinea Pigs [wikipedia.org] thus has its 1933 direction of muckraking reversed. This book was on my RN grandma's bookshelf, and I devoured it when I was young.
      • 100,000,00 Guinea Pigs [wikipedia.org] thus has its 1933 direction of muckraking reversed. This book was on my RN grandma's bookshelf, and I devoured it when I was young.

        Yup, and they still do that crap. While food is fairly well controlled, medicine is a disaster. As people become more and more expecting miracles in a pill, we're getting some freaky side effects.

        Men are regularly put on meds that kill their ability to get an erection. A friend in his mid 30's was suggested to go on Cholesterol meds. I pulled him aside.. "You just got married last year, do you and your wife enjoy intimacy?" Oh hell yeah!" The you really need to check out the side effects of what statins

  • If they put this stuff in raw sewage, RFK Jr. might go swimming in it and finally get something that will remove him from the world.

  • by Flu ( 16236 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @11:03AM (#66230028)
    Pfas are banned or limited in food in almost all western countries - except USA. Why is USA afraid of protecting its citizens?
    • I think because the USA culture is pathological in generally letting people fend for themselves rather than helping them, at least at the level of government. In this case, individuals like you and me supposedly have freedom of choice against the economic far west dominated by big companies, who by the way are also allowed to "lobby" lawmakers. I think this absolutism about freedom of choice, which in practice is largely illusory, is deeply ingrained in the culture. Therefore it's ok if companies are dishon

  • The amount of know toxic chemicals allowed by the USDA is food is almost as long as Santaâ(TM)s naughty and nice list. Just look how many decades did it take until lead was banned in the US compared to every other country with similar economic prosperity.
  • How curious. (Score:4, Interesting)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Thursday July 09, 2026 @01:24PM (#66230288) Journal
    I realize that it's all about keeping the corporate sponsors happy; but I'm perpetually a bit puzzled by how the 'culture war' stuff never seems to result in any related action on things like food contamination (outside of a few 'crunchy'/'natural' influencers who make some social media noise but are essentially irrelevant from a regulatory perspective).

    If one were looking for something remotely resembling intellectual coherence wouldn't the legality of persistent compounds that sure do seem to make endocrinologists nervous in food really get the people who are loudly concerned about biological gender or white birth rates motivated? However much you overestimate the ability of liberal propagandists surely you would take good, old-fashioned, chemical effects on the endocrine system even more seriously?
  • What evidence is there that all/some/any of these chemicals are "dangerous"?

It is your destiny. - Darth Vader

Working...