I’ve been hearing a lot recently about the GRAS classification being a prime target of the MAHA strategy. I understand the rationale, but I am concerned that a shotgun approach to this could backfire in a very problematic way. During the Clinton administration, a Republican controlled Congress passed a law that protected the nutritional supplement market. A key component of the law was to grandfather in herbal medicines and other supplements based on their GRAS status. If GRAS is eliminated in order to target food additives, how do we prevent the destruction of the supplement market?
I already have complete control over the additives in my food by choosing to eat organic and reading nutrition and ingredient labels closely. Another key component of my healthcare strategy over the past 40 years has been the precision use of herbal medicines and nutritional supplements. I would be very unhappy if I lost access to many herbs and nutritional supplements in order to address an issue that could be addressed with consumer education and company boycotts rather than heavy-handed government regulation. I don’t want to see the baby get thrown out with the bathwater.
I think the way we handled tobacco might be a good model. Tobacco is certainly far more dangerous than any of the food additives. Yet, we handled that with consumer education and warning labels on products. This has dramatically reduced consumption and is the main reason for the per capita decline in deaths from heart disease over the past five decades. This will also pacify our libertarian allies. And, if some states want to go further and levy high taxes on products containing these substances to control their consumption, that again follows the model of tobacco.