Tag: Food policy

Introducing the Food, Race, and Equity Initiative

by Heliya Izadpanah and Lavanya Sathyamurthy*

This is Part I of a two-part post.

Dreaming of Food Justice in Law

By Heliya Izadpanah

UCLA Law was my dream school. Like many law schools, it catered to my interests in human rights law and environmental law. But what made the decision to attend UCLA Law a no-brainer were two rare institutional assets–its groundbreaking Critical Race Studies program paired with one of the few Food Law programs then existing in the nation.

I was a passionate advocate for food systems justice. We all interact with food daily, yet its production and distribution are rarely observed in modern society. People often don’t know the conditions under which their food is produced or the legal machines maintaining these systems. But when it comes down to it, it’s virtually impossible to identify even a single food item that isn’t riddled with disparities of race, rights, and inequity. From growing food, to harvesting, processing, transportation, access, and health outcomes, every aspect of food systems is steeped in disparities of race, gender, wealth, status, and ability.

As a teenager, I was inspired by Black Power activists and other POC leaders steeped in food systems—Fannie Lou Hamer and the Freedom Farms Collective, Black Panthers like Erika Huggins who created the nation’s first free breakfast program, and Shirley Chisholm, a key architect of WIC and SNAP programs. Similarly, I looked up to the founding organizers of Farmworkers United—Dolores Huerta and Cesar Chavez—for their achievements in food production. Each of these leaders knew the power of food, revealing its power to either hold one in oppression or to act as a focal point for movement building, community power, sovereignty, and emancipation. I was eager to learn how to use law as a tool for food systems justice and get involved in the food law program.

Continue reading “Introducing the Food, Race, and Equity Initiative” →

Introducing the Food, Race, and Equity Initiative, Part II

by Heliya Izadpanah and Lavanya Sathyamurthy*

This is Part II of a two-part post.

Why Start Here?

by Lavanya Sathyamurthy



UCLA, home to the Resnick Center for Food Law and Policy and the Critical Race Studies Program, is the perfect place to start a movement focused on infusing issues of equity into food law curricula. The Resnick Center for Food Law and Policy adopts a multi-faceted approach to legal research and scholarship, through courses, conferences, and academic collaboration. The Center offers various classes at the law school. Specifically, the ‘Food Law and Policy Seminar’ exposed me to a wide variety of approaches to food law. As my classmates presented on the right to food and food advertising to children, I realized that food law intersects with every area of law. Immediately, I wanted to connect food law with my background in critical race studies and, more specifically, my experiences as an Asian-American navigating the higher education food landscape. I wrote my paper about the importance of data disaggregation among racial groups within the Asian-American diaspora in crafting solutions to combat food insecurity at the University of California campuses.

Continue reading “Introducing the Food, Race, and Equity Initiative, Part II” →

In Search of Greener GRAS: How Regulatory Policy has Created the American Diet and How to Fix it

by Trey Catanzaro*

If you ask most Americans what food additives they may “generally recognize as safe,” it is highly unlikely that they would answer “propyl paraben” or “beta hydroxy acid.” Rather, they may say vinegar, olive oil, or black pepper. In fact, when asked about what “generally recognized as safe” means, a national poll found that 77 percent of respondents thought that standard meant the FDA has evaluated the product and determined it to be safe. However, under current FDA regulations, a company may self-determine whether its product is “generally recognized as safe” under FDA guidelines, and then bring it to market without even notifying the FDA as to its existence. In other words, there are currently thousands of chemicals in everyday food that the FDA has no clue even exist. As succinctly stated by the former Deputy Commissioner for Food at the FDA, “[w]e simply do not have the information to vouch for the safety of many of these chemicals.”

Most chemical additives enter the American food supply due to an exception in FDA pre-market review for ingredients that are generally recognized as safe (GRAS). In legislation drafted in 1958 to address the rising issue of additives in food, Congress specifically exempted certain ingredients which were “generally recognized . . . to be safe under the conditions of [their] intended use” from the definition of additives. Therefore, anything determined to be GRAS would not be subject to pre-market review and approval by the FDA. At the time of passing the amendment, the reasoning for the GRAS exemption was so that ingredients that had long been used in foods without apparent harmful effects, such as salt, sugar and other familiar substances, would not have to undergo extensive testing to be used in food products. However, the GRAS exemption continued to expand, eventually permitting companies to self-determine whether their ingredient was GRAS, and giving them the choice of whether or not to notify the FDA of their GRAS determination.

Under the present iteration of the rule, companies’ GRAS determinations are filled with a litany of conflicts of interest. Rather than relying on peer-reviewed data, companies often convene panels of experts to make a GRAS determination. These panels are frequently made up of the same small group of individuals who have made a career out of GRAS panel participation. To put this in perspective, a comprehensive study looked at convened GRAS determination panels from the year 2015 to 2020, and, out of the 732 panel positions available, there were a mere 7 individuals who filled 339 (46%) of these positions. Their determinations of safety are often never sent to the FDA for review. Further, even if a GRAS determination is sent to the FDA for notification, which is not required, and valid concerns are raised about the safety of the product, this does not always preclude the product from coming to market. Companies have the ability to voluntarily withdraw their petitions should they foresee unfavorable results from the FDA’s review. Therefore, after receiving health concerns from the FDA based on its review of a GRAS notification, the company may then withdraw its notification and continue to market the product. The FDA will then issue a letter of withdrawal without acknowledging the safety concerns raised during the review.

Continue reading “In Search of Greener GRAS: How Regulatory Policy has Created the American Diet and How to Fix it” →

Restricted Access to the “First Food”: Dissecting Breastfeeding Injustices 

August was Breastfeeding Awareness Month. But as Chidera Anthony-Wise discusses below, this issue is critical year-round.

by Chidera Anthony-Wise*

Introduction 

The first food countless infants receive upon arrival into the world is breast milk. The health benefits of breastfeeding are remarkable for babies and mothers. Breast milk strengthens nervous system development and ocular ability of infants. Through breastfeeding, antibodies are introduced to infant immune systems, combatting various diseases. Conditions such as asthma, cardiovascular disease, obesity, type 1 diabetes, and sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) are less likely among babies that are breastfed. Similarly, lactation is associated with a reduced risk in ovarian and breast cancers and type 2 diabetes in nursing mothers. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), it is strongly recommended to exclusively breastfeed babies for the first 6 months of life and subsequently accompany solid foods with breastmilk for up to 2 years or beyond. Still, there are a plethora of challenges that hinder the adherence to this expert advice. 

Breast milk offers all the nutrients, proteins, and hydration a baby needs for those first 6 months. The release of breast milk is through a “supply and demand” mechanism. If a nursing mother does not have preexisting health conditions that would limit milk production, a full supply of breast milk is dependent on feeding frequency. The provision of formula milk can decrease breast milk supply due to reduced breastfeeding sessions. Despite the WHO recommendation, 2.7 million of the 3.6 million infants born annually in the United States consume formula milk by the age of three months. 

Continue reading “Restricted Access to the “First Food”: Dissecting Breastfeeding Injustices “ →

Edible Vaccines: The Intersection of Agriculture, Medicine, and Regulation

by Chidera Anthony-Wise*

Farmers might just be the new pharmacists. 

Through scientific breakthroughs, plant products can be genetically modified to deliver immunity against diseases. These “edible vaccines” present remarkable possibilities at the intersection of agriculture and biotechnology. 

One such possibility is to assist immunization efforts on national and global scales. Many low-income nations and US cities such as Chelsea, Massachusetts and Hyde Park, New York lack essential access to vaccines due to expensive costs, maintenance challenges, and improper distribution. The use of common fruits and vegetables as vehicles to immunity could, for this reason, be a tool toward achieving equity. In addition to disease protection, edible vaccines can also be used to alleviate malnutrition because highly nutritious foods, such as tomatoes, lettuce, bananas, corn, and rice, are frequently used as host plants. 

History

In the 1990s, Dr. Charles Arntzen and his team spearheaded the production of an early edible vaccine, a surface protein antigen A derived from Streptococcus mutans successfully expressed in tobacco. This edible vaccine has the capability of alleviating infectious endocarditis, or bacteria occupation in the inner lining of the heart. Arntzen and his colleagues went on to develop a heat-labile toxin, B subunit in potatoes to potentially treat hepatitis B. There is a large focus on protein production in relation to edible vaccine efficacy, as antibodies and protective white blood cells are created by the immune system in the presence of spike (S) proteins. Therefore, to showcase that plant-derived hepatitis B surface antigen could generate a mucosal immune response, host plant potatoes have been optimized to become protein-rich. Other edible vaccine examples include transgenic carrots against HIV and E coli, lettuce against malaria, and spinach against rabies.

Continue reading “Edible Vaccines: The Intersection of Agriculture, Medicine, and Regulation” →

The Urgent Need to Update the Regulation of GM Crops

by Alice Carli*

Humans have been altering plants for upwards of 10,000 years through a wide variety of techniques for genetic modification. In the 20th century, scientists developed transgenic genetic engineering, which combines DNA from two or more sources to achieve a desired trait. This discovery fundamentally altered our ability to manipulate crops and opened a Pandora’s box of commercial possibilities and political conflicts. More recently, the advent of CRISPR and other precision gene editing technologies has resurfaced tensions around the role of genetically modified (“GM”) crops in our agricultural and food systems.

Despite these longstanding tensions, the U.S. has the world’s largest production of GM crops by acreage, and it is estimated that over 75% of processed foods on our supermarket shelves contain genetically engineered ingredients.

At the same time, the country faces systemic sustainability challenges exacerbated by climate change and intensive monoculture farming. These include flooding, soil degradation, air and water pollution, and biodiversity collapse. Significant and holistic changes to U.S. agriculture are needed to tackle these problems.

If regulated effectively, GM crops have the potential to make U.S. agriculture more sustainable and climate resilient. When designed with climate-smart features, these crops can significantly enhance nutrient or photosynthesis efficiency, provide flood, drought, and disease resistance, and even improve soil carbon sequestration.

Continue reading “The Urgent Need to Update the Regulation of GM Crops” →

The Poisoning of the Gerber Generation:

How Public Nuisance Law Could Address Heavy Metals in Baby Food in the Face of Regulatory Failure

by Lillian Matchett*

A cheerful jingle plays as beaming babies flash across a white background.  These children are the “Gerber Generation,” the voiceover tells you, and they have some big news to share: the nutrition they get in their first five years of life can affect their health forever.   “Think about that,” they say.

Gerber launched its Gerber Generation campaign in 2010 in the face of increased attention on childhood obesity, focusing on the health and nutritional needs of young children at a vital point in their development.  Gerber was right: what a child consumes in the first few years of their life is critically important, but as it turned out, there were other substances in at least some of the Gerber Generation’s food that could have a profound and lasting impact on children’s health.  In 2021, Gerber was one of several companies exposed for selling baby food containing concerning levels of heavy metals—toxins which, even in small amounts, can cause severe and irreversible cognitive impairment and physical illness in young children.

In 2021, a congressional subcommittee issued two reports finding high levels of heavy metals—lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury—in commercial baby foods from seven major manufacturers.  Heavy metals were present in baby foods from all companies, often at concentrations many times than that allowed under existing regulations for other food products.  The reports also illuminated failures of industry self-regulation, revealing that companies largely do not test their final products and often do not adhere to their own internal standards. 

Predictably, a deluge of litigation followed the release of the Congressional Reports.  Despite well-documented findings of high heavy metal levels in baby food and the known effects those substances have on children, lawsuits have thus far been mostly unavailing, failing on issues of causation and standing, though many are still making their way through the courts.  Regulatory and legislative solutions have also fallen short.  The FDA and Congress attempted to address the issue, but the FDA’s response has been slow and unenforceable, while legislation lacks bipartisan support, and has stalled in committee. 

Continue reading “The Poisoning of the Gerber Generation:” →

Discovering agricultural careers with the USDA: a summer program for teens

by Rosalie Winters*

[This is one in a series of occasional posts by Los Angeles high school students working with and studying food systems.]

This summer I attended the AgDiscovery program at Lincoln University in Jefferson City, Missouri. AgDiscovery is a program for high school students, and it is run by the USDA at multiple land grant universities nationwide. It aims to help teenagers explore careers in agricultural sciences. Each program across the country is unique, specializing in animal science, plant science, agribusiness, or a combination of the three, with pieces added that may explore topics like agricultural history or urban farming. You are only allowed to apply to one school, so it is important to choose one that includes things you are passionate about. The program at Lincoln is a combination, providing students with an introduction to the many moving parts that make up the country’s agricultural systems. This appealed to me because while I was very interested in agriculture, I knew almost nothing about it. 

The program at Lincoln included four distinct components. The first of these was a lecture series on varying agricultural topics. For example, we heard an etymologist speaking about different invasive species of insects and how they can affect various crops; a speaker discussing native plants and showing us some of the different species native to Missouri; and had a lesson on scientific writing and how to put together research. These informative lectures allowed us to gain a background for the things that we were seeing and experiencing in person. 

Continue reading “Discovering agricultural careers with the USDA: a summer program for teens” →

Exploring the Legal and Policy Implications Behind ‘High on the Hog’: Potential Solutions Forward (Part 4 of 4)

There are a variety of policy solutions that have the potential to help elevate and preserve Black cuisine and resolve inequities faced by Black Americans in the American food system. This post will explore ideas that relate to the preservation of Black culinary tradition, supporting Black farmers and culinary professionals, and increasing the access of culturally-relevant foods to Black communities in order to honor the richness of America’s culinary landscape. 

Preservation of Black Culinary Traditions

The preservation of Black culinary traditions is important to ensure that Black communities are able to celebrate their cultural heritage and to allow for greater recognition of Black people’s contributions to the culinary world. Initiatives like funding programs and grants to support culinary research, education, and documentation of traditional Black food practices could help with this cultural preservation. Furthermore, educational initiatives that introduce Black American cuisine into school curricula have the ability to educate young people about the cuisine’s significance and influence on American food. FoodCorps is an AmeriCorps grantee that has begun undertaking this type of initiative. During black history month of this year (February 2023), the organization held educational programming at elementary schools which taught black history through a culinary lens. 

Continue reading “Exploring the Legal and Policy Implications Behind ‘High on the Hog’: Potential Solutions Forward (Part 4 of 4)” →

Exploring the Legal and Policy Implications Behind ‘High on the Hog’: Black Farmers, Land Loss and Its Implications (Part 3 of 4)

Throughout “High on the Hog”, one can see a deep connection between Black American culinary traditions and farming. However, this connection has been threatened by a variety of policies that have limited Black American land ownership and access. For example, certain policies by the USDA, which has earned itself a description as “the last plantation,” such as allowing local (mostly white) farmers to determine Black farmers’ eligibility for USDA funding, have led to Black Americans’ loss of land. In Pigford v. Glickman, the racial discrimination class-action brought against the USDA by Black farmers, the USDA agreed to the largest civil-rights settlement in U.S. history of $1.25 billion. However, many eligible Black farmers have not been compensated. 

The number of Black farmers in America has decreased dramatically over the past 100 years, with less than 2 percent of farms in the United States owned or operated by Black Americans. This figure is a significant decrease from 1920, when 14.3% of American farms were operated by Black farmers. While there was a small increase in the number of Black farmers from 1.3% to 1.4% between 2007 and 2012, both Black rural and urban farmers continue to face challenges including land access, zoning laws, and financing. Public policies in the agricultural sector have historically disproportionately favored large-scale farmers and contributed to the marginalization of Black farmers. 

Continue reading “Exploring the Legal and Policy Implications Behind ‘High on the Hog’: Black Farmers, Land Loss and Its Implications (Part 3 of 4)” →

Website Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑