Science
RFK Jr. wants to make food safer. Trump wants to make it cheaper. Can we have both?
To hear Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tell it, making America healthy again means making American food healthy again.
The nation’s top health official says hundreds of additives should be removed from the U.S. food supply out of concern that they’re contributing to a rash of chronic health problems.
Plenty of Americans share his wariness. In a Gallup poll conducted in the summer, 28% of respondents said they had “not much” confidence in the federal government’s ability to ensure the food supply was safe, while 14% had “none at all.”
“Our food system as currently constituted is not designed to maximize health,” said Dr. James Krieger, executive director of Healthy Food America.
Kennedy insists it doesn’t have to be that way. And as the newly installed leader of the Department of Health and Human Services, he is in a prime position to change that.
But subjecting food additives to more scientific scrutiny won’t be cheap, experts warn. The added costs would present a hurdle at any time, but especially now as President Trump aims to reduce the price of eggs and other groceries.
“Food safety is in everyone’s best interest, including the manufacturers,” said Michael T. Roberts, executive director of the Resnick Center for Food Law and Policy at UCLA Law. “There’s only one thing that cuts against a full investment in food safety, and that is the cost.”
One of Kennedy’s biggest priorities could be the most expensive: closing a loophole that allows companies to vouch for the safety of new food additives by declaring them “generally recognized as safe,” or GRAS. The designation was initially intended for familiar items such as salt, vinegar and baking powder but now applies to more than 1,000 compounds, experts estimate.
Food makers that take advantage of the GRAS loophole are supposed to conduct a scientific assessment to make sure their new ingredients will not increase risks for developmental disorders, disrupt the endocrine system, trigger allergies or lead to other health problems. But companies are not required to share those assessments with the Food and Drug Administration, nor to notify the agency when they introduce a novel additive to the food supply.
“Nowadays somebody finds a new product — a new seed or a new plant somewhere else in the world — and they start using it,” said Neal Fortin, director of the Institute for Food Laws and Regulations at Michigan State University.
That’s how a substance called tara flour became an ingredient in a meat-replacement product sold by Daily Harvest and sickened hundreds of customers in 2022. More than 100 were hospitalized with severe problems including acute liver failure, and the product was recalled.
Tara flour “was never submitted to the FDA, and it didn’t have to be submitted to the FDA,” Fortin said. The manufacturer “self-declared it as being safe and it harmed a lot of people.”
If it were up to him, Fortin said, he’d require companies to share their safety studies with the FDA so that regulators could check them for red flags.
“All they have to do is look for problems,” he said. “If they see one they can slow it down or stop it, or ask for more information” before the ingredient goes on the market.
Researchers have estimated that implementing this type of plan would roughly double the number of additives evaluated by agency scientists each year.
Food-safety advocates also have called on the FDA to step up its oversight of additives that are already on store shelves.
“Things that may have been in the food supply for 50 years do occasionally need to be reevaluated,” Fortin said. “Dietary patterns change. Formulations change. Before, maybe we were only getting red dye in maraschino cherries. Now it’s in a ton of different things.”
The agency has been revamping its system for reassessing GRAS ingredients, preservatives, food dyes and the like, giving priority to those suspected of posing a risk to public health. Under the FDA’s proposal, a comprehensive assessment of a food additive could take a year or more, the agency said.
In a statement Monday to the Times, an FDA official said that those and other efforts “to safeguard the food supply and ensure that food is a vehicle for wellness” are still on track. “We remain committed to moving forward with our priorities to develop a new post-market safety assessment framework and to improve processes for pre-market review of additives,” the official said.
A Food and Drug Administration scientist tests for undisclosed and potentially dangerous ingredients in products marketed as dietary supplements.
(Michael J. Ermarth / U.S. Food and Drug Administration)
Analyzing additives — either before or after they are on the market — takes manpower, and more work will require more money. Yet the $1.2-billion budget for the FDA’s food program in fiscal year 2024 was dwarfed by the $3.7 billion devoted to drugs, biologics and medical devices for people.
Experts both inside and outside the agency — including its recently departed commissioner, Dr. Robert Califf — have called on Congress to appropriate more funds for food regulation, but they’re not holding their breath.
“More money from Congress is not in the cards,” said Dr. Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit focused on public health issues. “Realistically, it’s not happening.”
So some would like to adopt a practice used elsewhere in the FDA — charging companies a fee to have their new products vetted by the agency. Such user fees accounted for $3.3 billion of the FDA’s $7.2-billion budget in 2024.
Though they’ve funded important work, user fees have also introduced the appearance of a conflict of interest. Kennedy has criticized them for giving deep-pocketed companies an advantage over startups, and for giving the pharmaceutical industry leverage over regulators.
Lurie is sympathetic to those critiques.
“My overall opinion on user fees is that they’re not a good idea,” he said. “But the problem is that they’re better than the alternative.”
Jennifer Pomeranz, a public health lawyer at New York University’s School of Global Public Health, sees user fees as sensible way to pay for more food safety. Such fees don’t change the work FDA scientists do, she said. They just make it possible to get the work done faster.
Although the companies would pay for the reviews, that wouldn’t guarantee that their applications pass muster. Plenty of drug and medical device candidates are rejected by regulators, Pomeranz said. User fees fund the process, not the outcome, she said.
Getting rid of the GRAS loophole and implementing user fees to pay for independent regulatory reviews would actually reduce the FDA’s dependence on food companies, said Sean Cash, a food economist and chair of the Division of Food, Agriculture and the Environment at Tufts University.
“In the current regime, we’re already relying heavily on inputs and attestations from industry,” he said. Curtailing that will increase trust in the food system, he believes.
These changes, of course, would cost the companies money. Several experts agreed that companies might respond by raising prices, though it’s unclear how much they could get away with before damaging their businesses.
Shoppers are more sensitive to price increases for food than for drugs, which could minimize the toll on consumers, Cash said. Besides, any inflationary effect of user fees is likely to be swamped by the effects of other policy changes, such as reducing the number of immigrants in the workforce and imposing tariffs on imported goods.
The costs of reviewing additives already in use could be minimized if the FDA took advantage of work already done by regulators in the European Union and elsewhere, Pomeranz said. “When other countries ban ingredients, why do we wait 20 years to do the same thing?”
Even if stricter scrutiny of additives results in higher food prices, that may be preferable to maintaining the status quo, Cash said.
“If they’re really not safe for us, is that a trade-off we want to make?” he said. If we don’t take a closer look at these ingredients, “are we going to pay for it in other ways later?”
Science
Why new dads shouldn’t panic about low testosterone
Three months after his son was born, Kevin Maguire felt alone.
It was 2019. He had recently moved to Barcelona with his wife and daughter and was working on marketing projects for Fortune 500 companies. The birth of his son, Bodhi, should have been a joyous event. But Maguire, now 43, became sad and irritable, and didn’t want to be around his newborn. He withdrew from family and friends, often playing video games late into the night or finding excuses to get out of the house.
“I would take the dog out for a walk,” Maguire said. “I wanted to get far away enough that I wouldn’t bump into anyone I knew and I would just sit and cry.”
Desperate for answers, he entered his symptoms online. Maguire, author of the recently published book “The New Fatherhood: Why Everything They Told You About Being a Dad Is Wrong, and How Embracing It Will Transform Your Life,” knew to look for signs of the “baby blues” in his wife. But he was surprised by articles that said men could experience postpartum depression too. The diagnosis resonated and he began writing about his condition and the trials of fatherhood on Substack.
New dads face psychological pressures, from sleepless nights to sky-high bills, which can contribute to postpartum depression. So can shifting hormone levels.
“One thing I found in my lab’s research is that when new dads have really low levels of testosterone, they might report more symptoms of postpartum depression,” said Darby Saxbe, a professor of psychology at USC and author of the recently published “Dad Brain: The New Science of Fatherhood and How It Shapes Men’s Lives.”
While hormonal shifts can create challenges, they also help men adapt to fatherhood, Saxbe explained. Several hormones can spike in men when they become dads, including oxytocin, linked to better relationship quality; vasopressin, associated with emotional bonding; and prolactin, which promotes lactation in women and caregiving behavior in guys.
New dads can also experience a decline in testosterone. According to a 2011 paper from University of Notre Dame professor Lee Gettler, part of the largest study on fatherhood and testosterone ever conducted, men averaged around a 25% drop in testosterone after becoming fathers.
While dads have reasons to be concerned by plummeting levels of testosterone, a modest dip isn’t necessarily a disaster — in fact, it can make men better parents and partners.
“We often get invested in the idea that men should always have the highest possible levels of testosterone,” Saxbe said. “What the research tells us is a little more nuanced. You really want flexibility. You want a hormonal system that can adapt to the different demands of your life.”
The prospect of a decline might scare soon-to-be fathers, especially those on TikTok and Instagram, where accounts push the idea that having “high T” is the key to being a “real man,” according to a recent study in the journal Social Science & Medicine.
Influencers stand to profit persuading men there’s a widespread “masculinity crisis,” the researchers found, noting that 72% of the accounts they analyzed had a stake in testosterone supplements and treatments.
But studies show more testosterone isn’t always better. “We found that when dads have higher testosterone, even before birth, they’re less invested [than men with lower testosterone] in co-parenting a few months after birth,” Saxbe said. High T fathers were more stressed from parenting than their lower T counterparts, and had partners who were less satisfied in their romantic relationships.
This jibes with the challenge hypothesis, which says, in multiple species, testosterone levels rise when males battle for attention from potential mates and go down when it’s time to take care of the young.
While a small decline can be adaptive, dads face mental health risks when their testosterone drops too low.
There is no “normal” level of testosterone, said Dr. Jesse Mills, director of the Men’s Clinic at UCLA Health. Experts recommend that men should consider treatment if their levels dip below 300 nanograms per deciliter (ng/dL). But men metabolize testosterone in different ways, meaning a healthy level for one might be low for another.
“If a new dad comes to me and his testosterone is 298 [ng/dL], he’s below the threshold,” Mills said. “But if he has zero symptoms and everything else is going great — he’s over the moon with his new child, he’s so happy — that’s not somebody I’m going to treat with testosterone.”
He notes that the drop in testosterone fathers experience can partly be attributed to the stresses that come with a new kid: less sleep, a poor diet and fewer trips to the gym. That means there are precautions that expectant fathers can take that don’t involve testosterone replacement therapy (TRT).
Still, while some guys with low testosterone levels might not need TRT, others in the “normal” range could benefit from treatment. (Dads who want another kid soon, beware. Mills notes that testosterone replacement therapy can take a man’s sperm count to zero.)
Both Mills and Saxbe stress that men should be paying attention to symptoms of low testosterone — such as depression and low libido — rather than trying to reach or maintain an ideal number. They also agree that tending to mental health concerns is hugely important for new fathers.
Eventually, after Maguire researched his condition, he recovered after time spent meditating, exercising and bonding with his son.
“A lot of new dads don’t realize how much they’re struggling because they feel ashamed or because they don’t realize it’s common shortly after the birth of a baby,” Saxbe said.
When they struggle, fathers can fixate on testosterone because that’s what modern culture tells them will make them feel better. And sometimes testosterone replacement therapy works. But Saxbe stresses a lot of men could use psychotherapy or support groups that bring dads together, as well as more time bonding with loved ones in general.
“The thing that predicts a man’s well-being and longevity is the quality of his relationships with other people,” said Saxbe. “You can be the world’s best weightlifter. You can have a low body-fat percentage. You can be killing it at work. Those things don’t predict how happy you’re going to be at 80.”
Science
Video: NASA Announces Artemis III Crew
new video loaded: NASA Announces Artemis III Crew
transcript
transcript
NASA Announces Artemis III Crew
NASA announced the crew of Artemis III mission, which will fly to low-Earth orbit to test rendezvous and docking maneuvers with one or two lunar landers.
-
“I am excited to welcome you as the next crew in the Artemis journey to successfully return to the moon — this time to stay.” “I’m honored by the role that I’ve been given. I’m also very humbled by the task in front of us. But first and foremost, I’m grateful.” “So with that, the Artemis II crew, comrade, hands you the baton. You got the controls.” “As you know, we had a significant anomaly at our Launch Complex 36A on May 28. We’ve redoubled our efforts and are moving forward.”
By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff
June 9, 2026
Science
Santa Monica Mountains’ last steelhead trout survived the Palisades fire — and even had babies
Scientists feared the Santa Monica Mountains’ last remaining steelhead trout were dead, smothered by debris flows unleashed by the Palisades fire.
But the endangered fish surprised them: A team of biologists recently spotted 30 of the rare trout — and 21 babies — in Topanga Creek.
“There was a lot of happy dancing in the creek,” said Rosi Dagit, principal conservation biologist for the Resource Conservation District of the Santa Monica Mountains, which works with public and private landowners to conserve natural resources.
That’s because the steelhead here are endangered, at both the state and federal levels. Once, they swam in most streams of the Santa Monicas, but their numbers plummeted amid overfishing and coastal development. Increasingly frequent wildfire has further stressed their habitat. Topanga Creek, a biodiversity hot spot, is home to their last known population in the mountains that stretch from the Hollywood Hills to Point Mugu in Ventura County.
The trout that were spotted, including this one, are part of a distinct Southern California population that’s listed as endangered at the state and federal levels.
(RCDSMM Stream Team)
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife spearheaded a complex mission to rescue trout threatened by the Palisades fire that sparked in January 2025.
Time was of the essence. The fire hadn’t yet been fully contained. But rain was on the way, which would sweep massive amounts of sediment from the denuded hillsides into the water. Fish are often killed this way.
Crews stunned the fish with electricity, scooped them up in buckets, trucked them to a hatchery and ultimately moved them to Arroyo Hondo Creek in Santa Barbara County.
Within days, Topanga Creek was choked with mud. Some assumed the fish left behind were goners.
But in March, the conservation district’s team found four. The following month, when water conditions were clearer, they saw more.
“These fish continue to amaze me,” said Kyle Evans, environmental program manager for the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, who had seen the damage to the creek. “I had seen populations get wiped out in similar situations. So when I heard, I was thrilled.”
Evans surmises the fish that survived were in an area of the creek where less charred material and sediment were swept in.
“These fish likely hunkered down, were hiding under some rocks or places to try to get away from the main concentration of flow,” he said. “And luckily they weren’t buried.”
The ones that were spotted were fairly small, around 6 to 14 inches. Rainbow trout and steelhead trout are the same species, but with different lifestyles. If the fish remain in freshwater, they’ll be considered rainbows. However, they can migrate to the ocean and become steelhead, where they typically grow larger before returning to their natal waters to spawn.
Topanga Creek hasn’t fully recovered from the damage it sustained, but scientists say it’s looking better. Surveys last year were “so depressing,” Dagit said, with very few animals, and stretches that were essentially transformed into flat roads from all the sediment buildup. Some of the riparian canopy burned right down to the creek.
Then came 32 inches of rain over the last nine months, scouring out and moving sediment, creating deeper pools. Dagit said they recently found newt egg masses for the first time in years, as well as a few adult newts and many frogs. Plants that provide cover are starting to recover.
She provided photos comparing certain pools last year and this year, some dramatically transformed. In September 2025, the Shrine Pool could have been an overgrown hiking trail. This April, it was filled with shallow water.
The Shrine Pool in September 2025, left, and the same location in April 2026, right, with RCDSMM’s Isaac Yelchin donning a wetsuit.
(RCDSMM Stream Team)
Topanga Creek is home to another endangered fish, the small but hardy northern tidewater goby, often described as cute. Not long before the trout operation, Dagit led a rescue of hundreds of these fish too. Many were repatriated to the lagoon at the mouth of the creek in a moving ceremony last June.
There’s still the matter of what to do with the trout that were moved to Santa Barbara County last year. Evans would like to bring them home to the Santa Monicas at some point, but isn’t sure if it will happen. On one hand, they could bolster the small, genetically isolated surviving population. On the other, they might inadvertently bring in a disease or bacteria. There is some time to decide. Evans estimates the creek still needs to recover for two to three more years.
For now, the fish are functioning fine in their adopted creek. Experts worried the trauma wrought by the move would disrupt their spawning process, but they had babies that spring. This year, they spawned again.
-
Minnesota4 minutes ago
Feds won’t seek death penalty in plea deal with man accused of killing top Minnesota Democrat | CNN
-
Mississippi7 minutes agoMississippi man dies in motorcycle crash on I-10 | WKRG.com
-
Missouri12 minutes agoKansas City, Missouri, police investigating Wednesday afternoon homicide at 43rd, Paseo
-
Montana19 minutes agoHGTV names The Garden Barn Montana’s must-visit garden center
-
Nebraska22 minutes agoNebraska State Runner-up and Futures Finalist Matt Brailita (2026) to Swim for Johns Hopkins
-
Nevada27 minutes agoRanking Nevada football’s 2026 opponents from least interesting to most interesting
-
New Hampshire34 minutes agoMan With Warrants Chased Through Bow, Concord: New Hampshire State Police Roundup
-
New Jersey37 minutes agoNew Jersey beach report: Where is it safe to swim?