In Charlotte, HHS Secretary RFK Jr. pushes for plastic alternatives to prevent food contamination
Kennedy is looking at a number of environmental and food-based systems where he said Americans, and especially children, come in contact with chemicals he said could be contributing the rise in chronic disease across the country.
'It won't be easy to change an entire system that's poisoning America,' he said. 'I don't want to drag industry kicking and screaming. I want to ask for an alliance.'
At a conference of packaging, food industry and plastic science professionals in Steele Creek, RFK called for innovative solutions to our reliance on plastic packaging, which he said is hurting our health and environment.
'Microplastics and chemicals from food production and assembly lines and packaging don't only end up in our food, they end up in our soil, our water, our oceans,' he said. 'And from there they re-enter the food supply.'
Research into microplastics, tiny plastic fragments usually from broken-down material, is still in its early stages, but scientists have found evidence those plastic fragments can bioaccumulate in the environment and even in human tissue. Studies have linked microplastics to poor health outcomes like heart disease and decreased fertility.
At the same time, plastic is ubiquitous in our daily lives and especially in food production and packaging to keep food fresh, prevent leaks and provide light-weight, air-tight storage.
Kennedy said his administration will work to incentivize alternatives, but industry leaders need to take initiative when it comes to finding solutions.
Wes Carter, the president of Atlantic Packaging, said his company specializes in finding those sustainable answers. The company, which hosted Kennedy's roundtable, works with a lot of paper and fiber-based packaging. But when it comes to food packaging, he said biodegradable or recyclable alternatives to plastic require more creativity.
'We're also innovating a lot of new alternative materials in things like plastic made from seaweed or mycelium or food waste,' he said.
Meanwhile, groups like the Southern Environmental Law Center, which has been involved in numerous cases advocating for stricter regulation around forever chemicals and plastic pollution, are skeptical that Kennedy's strategies will do enough to address the contamination he's concerned about.
Mary McLean Asbill, the director of the SELC's North Carolina office, pointed to recent statements from the Trump Administration's EPA director, Lee Zeldin, in which he promises to roll back federal protections for streams, rivers and wetlands and restrictions on air pollution, particularly for fossil fuel-fired power plants.
'I would have hope if I didn't read the newspaper every day and see all the tweets and hear all the speeches and read the executive orders that are completely in contrast to what RFK Jr. has said,' she said.
Asbill said RFK, Jr. and the EPA could work to maintain and enforce strict pollution standards in through the Clean Air and Water Acts and encourage state regulators to do the same.
'I'd like to see more stringent regulations and protections coming out of EPA, and then also from all of our state governments in North Carolina, our state agency has tried time and time again to regulate forever chemicals, and the boards and commissions set up by our extremely anti-regulatory legislature have slow rolled those rules from coming out,' she said.
(VIDEO: NC Supreme Court sides with RFK Jr., orders ballots reprinted without name)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
13 minutes ago
CDC launches new national campaign to tackle mental health, substance use among teens
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) launched a new campaign on Tuesday aimed at tackling mental health and substance use among teens ahead of the upcoming school year. The federal campaign, entitled Free Mind, aims to provide teens and their parents or caregivers with "resources and information about substance use, mental health and the connection between the two." The efforts revolve around the messaging that "drugs and mental health don't mix" according to the landing page of the new campaign on the CDC's website. "When you deal with lots of emotions, you might be tempted to turn to drugs and alcohol or cope by misusing medications that are not prescribed to you," the website states. Substance use, however, can cause or worsen anxiety, sadness, anger and depression, according to the CDC. It can also affect a patient's memory or mood. The CDC describes that drug overdose crisis as "constantly evolving" and "an important public health issue." More than 80,000 Americans died from a drug overdose last year, according to CDC data. In the last four years, 75% of overdose deaths among pre-teens and teenagers ages 10 to 19 involved illegally made fentanyl. The number of teens reporting poor mental health has increased in the past decade, with 40% of high school students stopping regular activities because of persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness in 2023. One in five students have seriously considered attempting suicide, according to the CDC. "Teens may use alcohol and other substances to help them cope with stress, anxiety, and depression," said Dr. Allison Arwady, director of the CDC's National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, in a press release. The agency said it spoke with adolescents. about their perceptions surrounding substance use in order to develop the messaging and branding for the new campaign. The initiative "seeks to resonate with this age group by addressing the connections between substance use and mental health, risk factors that contribute to drug use, and strategies to keep them safe," according to the CDC. Resources were also created for parents and caregivers around youth substance use and mental health challenges. "Talking openly about mental health and substance use, and knowing when to get professional help, is critical to helping teens stay healthy," Arwady said. "That's why this campaign supports youth, parents, and caregivers in having those conversations early, before an issue arises." If you or someone you know is struggling with thoughts of suicide - free, confidential help is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Call or text the national lifeline at 988.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
The FDA is targeting orange juice. Here's why, and what the science says.
Orange juice contains nutrients including calcium and Vitamin C. But some nutritionists argue that's not enough to make up for the unnecessary calories and natural sugars. 'Juices are a dilemma,' said Peter Lurie, the executive director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which advocates for a healthy and safe food supply. Get Winter Soup Club A six-week series featuring soup recipes and cozy vibes, plus side dishes and toppings, to get us all through the winter. Enter Email Sign Up The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends instead eating real fruit, which contains more fiber than juice. The association advises against giving fruit juice to infants except to manage constipation. It also advises limiting how much juice parents should give older children, such as no more than 4 ounces per day for kids 1 to 3 years old. Advertisement 'If you're going to have a small amount of juice, it's not going to be anything that anybody's going to worry about,' said Marion Nestle, a retired professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University who called fruit juices 'delicious.' 'When you worry about juice is when it's in large amounts,' she added. Advertisement Even though leading orange juice brands do not contain added sugars, high levels of natural sugars can still be harmful, some experts said. 'Orange juice is sugar water,' said Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina. 'Every juice is essentially sugar water.' Once touted as part of a balanced breakfast, Americans are souring on orange juice. Consumers have gravitated toward other beverage options seen as healthier. Prices have risen. Production has stalled. And this has become a problem for Florida's orange producers. The sugar content of the fruit grown in the state has been steadily dropping due to a bacterial disease afflicting the crop, exacerbated after Hurricane Irma struck in 2017. In 2022, Florida trade groups representing the state's citrus growers and citrus juice industry petitioned the FDA to lower the minimum fruit sugar levels for pasteurized orange juice. The FDA sets a minimum standard for the sugar content in order to call a drink 'pasteurized orange juice,' the kind commonly sold at grocery stores without added sugars. If manufacturers fall below that threshold, they are essentially no longer allowed to call their products 'pasteurized orange juice." Florida orange industry groups said lowering that threshold would protect their business and reduce orange imports from other countries while going unnoticed by consumers. Sugar per serving would lower from 18 grams to 17 grams, according to nutritional label samples provided to the FDA by the industry. Other nutrients would be largely unaffected to the change. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary both pledged to examine this proposal during congressional hearings when pressed by Sen. Ashley Moody (R-Florida). Advertisement Some nutrition experts said if Kennedy wanted to advance his 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda, which included pledges to improve the diets of children, he should champion more sweeping regulations broadly targeting sugars and sodium. 'If one is serious about sugar in the American diet, we need an across the board approach,' Lurie said.
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Something both sides agree on: A bill to prevent late-stage cancer
One million Medicare beneficiaries will be diagnosed with cancer this year. 600,000 people in the U.S. will die of cancer this year. Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide, affecting millions of families each year. Evidence consistently shows that early detection significantly improves treatment outcomes, reduces costs and saves lives. Investing in early detection is a critical and cost-effective public health strategy. Despite this, our healthcare system is still struggling to keep up. Many Americans, especially those living on fixed incomes, in rural communities or facing already limited access to healthcare, are being diagnosed at later stages of cancer, when outcomes are poorer and treatment much more expensive. And for too many, the diagnosis arrives not just as a health crisis, but as a financial one. I have worked with too many families who find themselves facing impossible choices — buy groceries for the week or cover their cancer treatments. Against this backdrop, Congress has a rare and urgent opportunity to act. Last year, members of the House Committee on Ways and Means shared deeply personal stories of how cancer has touched their lives as they reviewed and unanimously supported the Nancy Gardner Sewell Medicare Multi-Cancer Early Detection Screening Coverage Act. So, it should come as no surprise that the act is the first and only health care bill to garner majority support in both the House and Senate. That level of bipartisan consensus is almost unheard of. But the job isn't finished until this bill becomes law. My organization, the Cancer Support Community, and other nonprofits have seen where the system fails patients. Rural communities, in particular, face significant disparities in access to timely screening and care. Our data shows that longer travel times to treatment often result in later-stage diagnoses and lower quality of life. Catching cancer early can prevent this, offering patients the opportunity to receive less aggressive (and less expensive) treatment, and most importantly, more time with loved ones. Yet many cancers still lack reliable screening tools. Expanding investment in early detection is not only a medical imperative, it's an economic one. The earlier cancer is found, the less it costs to treat and the better the chances of survival. One estimate suggests that the preventative cancer screenings we do have saved the U.S. a cumulative $6.5 trillion over the last 25 years. The Nancy Gardner Sewell Act would modernize Medicare to allow for coverage of cutting-edge screening technologies that can detect dozens of cancers through a simple blood test. This policy would mark a turning point in the fight against cancer, particularly for older adults who face the highest risk and are often diagnosed in later stages. The support is overwhelming. More than 550 organizations representing cancer patients, providers, researchers and advocates have urged lawmakers to seize this moment. Congress has already thoroughly vetted this bill and cleared it for passage. When lawmakers return from their summer break, there will be no better time to get this bill over the finish line. Everything is ready to go. The support is there. Now is the time for passage.
