Happy Friday, and welcome to Food Fix. I actually had a completely different topic in mind for today, but so many people were talking about (and asking me about) this NOTUS report about the MAHA commission citing fake sources, I figured an explainer was in order.
Upgrade to paid: Friendly reminder that paid Food Fix subscribers get the newsletter twice a week and occasionally get breaking news before anyone else. Last week, subscribers got a copy of the MAHA commission report (complete with the original citations) five hours before it was posted online by the White House. Becoming a paid subscriber is the best way to ensure you never miss a dispatch!
Food Fix on the pods: I recently launched a new podcast with Theodore Ross over at the Food & Environment Reporting Network. We’ve put out three episodes so far and received such a great response. We’re going to be recording these more often starting this summer.
As always, I welcome feedback. Reply to this email to land in my inbox, or drop me a note: helena@foodfix.co.
Alright, let’s get to it –
Helena
***
MAHA commission report under fire over fake citations
The MAHA commission report released by the White House last week is back in the news in a big way after NOTUS, a startup news outlet, reported on Thursday that some of the citations in the report were fake.
The report was based on a review of the citations by reporters Emily Kennard and Margaret Manto who spent several days going through the MAHA commission report. Out of the report’s 522 citations, they found seven citations that listed research that didn’t exist and “dozens of citations with more mundane errors like broken links, missing or incorrect authors and wrong issue numbers.”
“NOTUS also found serious issues with how the report interpreted some of the existing studies it cites,” the report said.
The story quickly gained steam Thursday — within hours the New York Times, ABC, PBS, USA Today and others had picked it up, too. The reporters appeared on CNN primetime last night as well.
Citation fixes: At first blush, this perhaps doesn’t seem like that big of a deal. Within hours of the NOTUS report, the White House updated the MAHA report to fix the references to research that didn’t exist. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters during the press briefing that the White House has “complete confidence” in HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his “Make America Healthy Again” work.
“I understand there were some formatting issues with the MAHA report that are being addressed,” Leavitt said. “But it does not negate the substance of the report, which, as you know, is one of the most transformative health reports that’s ever been released by the federal government, and is backed on good science that has never been recognized by the federal government.”
Asked specifically about whether artificial intelligence was used to help write the report, Leavitt said, “I can’t speak to that” and referred to HHS. HHS, for its part, was also dismissive of the findings.
“Minor citation and formatting errors have been corrected, but the substance of the MAHA report remains the same — a historic and transformative assessment by the federal government to understand the chronic disease epidemic afflicting our nation’s children,” said Emily Hilliard, press secretary for HHS, adding: “It’s time for the media to also focus on what matters.”
Science matters: It’s true that the citations in question do not change the overall findings of the report, which paint a bleak picture of America’s health, but all this commotion fuels the already raging bonfire of concerns within the scientific community and beyond about Kennedy et al.’s lack of regard for science in general. This is an official U.S. government document — one that carries serious weight — so getting the science and the citations right matters. Kennedy’s team had to have known that this report would face next-level scrutiny since much of the scientific community does not trust RFK Jr. in the least, and the report is deeply threatening to the food, agriculture and chemical industries as well as the medical system. (Brush up on the reaction to the report, if you missed it last week.)
Last night, the Washington Post followed up with its own analysis of the MAHA report’s citations and went a step further, citing experts that said artificial intelligence appeared to have been used to write the report.
In that story, Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, torched the whole document over the citation issues. “This is not an evidence-based report, and for all practical purposes, it should be junked at this point,” he said. “It cannot be used for any policymaking. It cannot even be used for any serious discussion, because you can’t believe what’s in it.”
X chatter: On top of the coverage in the mainstream press, there’s been a lot of schadenfreude on social media. As Tim Alberta, a writer at The Atlantic, put it: “a little too on the nose for the ‘did my own research’ crowd.”
On Thursday, Calley Means, a top RFK Jr. advisor and a key author of the MAHA commission report, shot back at critics, alleging that they were not paying enough attention to the overall findings of the report.
“The least surprising thing about the MAHA Report is that the media and failed medical leaders are talking about footnotes instead of its actual content,” Means wrote late Thursday.
Means also hit back at the American Soybean Association, lawmakers and commentators.
The citation brouhaha also sparked some reaction from Capitol Hill on Thursday. House Agriculture Committee ranking member Angie Craig (D-Minn.) released a statement.
“The renewed focus on improving our overall health, and examining how food contributes to health outcomes, is something to be encouraged,” Craig said. “Working to make all Americans healthier is certainly worthwhile of a whole-of-government approach. That effort should be evidence-based and driven by cutting-edge science — not social media algorithms or ‘health’ influencer trends.
“The MAHA Commission Report is an over-ambitious document that fails to meet those standards,” she added. “It cites fake studies, misrepresents nutritional and agricultural science, and mistakes correlation for causation.”
Craig also took issue with the fact that the MAHA commission report touted a program in France that requires schools to “source half their products from local sources and prohibit vending machines,” which runs counter to the Trump administration’s recent cancellation of $1 billion in funding that helped U.S. schools source from local farmers.
What’s next: This citation dust up will likely die down, and then the MAHA commission will turn its focus to its next report, due in August. That report is supposed to outline the strategy to reverse the seriously concerning rates of chronic disease among children. While there has been plenty of tension over the first MAHA report, making policy recommendations is going to be much harder. RFK Jr. has repeatedly said he believes the food supply and other factors of American life are essentially poisoning all of us — so the question remains: What is the Trump administration going to do about it?
***
What I’m reading
Skittles removes controversial additive targeted by RFK Jr. (Bloomberg). “Mars Inc.’s Skittles candies are no longer being made with titanium dioxide, a chemical that whitens foods, brightens colors and makes candy appear shiny,” report Deena Shanker and Will Kubzansky. “The ingredient was removed from all Skittles production at the end of last year, the company confirmed to Bloomberg News. The additive was banned in the European Union in 2022 over concerns that nanoparticles of the substance might accumulate in the body and damage DNA. It has also come under scrutiny by the Department of Health and Human Services in recent months under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Titanium dioxide hasn’t been banned in the US, though Mars pledged to stop using the additive in 2016. It was still listed as an ingredient in Sour Skittles earlier this year. The company is now in the process of updating its website to reflect the reformulation, though shoppers may see products containing titanium dioxide on shelves until those products sell through.”
Who runs ‘MAHA’? Inside Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s inner circle as health secretary (Boston Globe). “When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. became health secretary, he didn’t just bring with him an unconventional and controversial approach to policy. He also elevated and empowered a group of like-minded deputies and advisers,” writes Tal Kopan. “With the exception of allies in Congress, all are new to government, and many are longtime gadflies who have made careers of criticizing policy makers and the health and food industries. Some have been heavily focused on Americans’ food supply and chronic diseases, while others are more from the world of vaccine skepticism and opposition, though their views often overlap. Many forged ties with each other as critics of mainstream public health measures during the COVID pandemic. At the core of the so-called “Make America Healthy Again” movement is scrutiny of ingredients in food, agricultural production, and vaccines, as well as a rejection of decades of scientific consensus, sometimes favoring fringe and debunked theories. Here are the key people in Kennedy’s orbit leading the charge.”
Grocery Update Volume 2, #4: MAHA or Misdirection (The Checkout). “America seems to be having it’s MAHA moment,” writes Errol Schweizer. “The Trump Administration released a much-anticipated white paper from the MAHA commission on May 22, 2025, [but] the concluding recommendations are a let down. They fall far short of a systemic game plan to overhaul the food supply. The MAHA report misses this forest for the trees, with a critique that leaves out its biggest and most vital targets. And the overall impact feels like misdirection, making big statements one way, while the administration’s day to day actions are 180 degrees opposed, as if simply being close to power, being invited to sit at the big table, is enough to make significant changes to the food supply.”
With Covid vaccine decisions, RFK Jr. unleashes an unfettered assault on public health (STAT). “Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s unilateral decision that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend Covid-19 shots for healthy people during childhood or pregnancy represents a bulldozing of safeguards intended to keep public health officials honest and their decisions transparent,” writes Matthew Herper in an opinion piece. “It also tramples on individuals’ ability to make their own decisions about medical evidence. Instead of slowing medicine’s pendulum so that it might eventually stop at a point of truth, Kennedy, the health secretary, is now swinging it so wildly that patients and doctors can do nothing but cover their heads and duck as medicine becomes more and more vulnerable to politicized extremes. His actions clearly suggest that if Kennedy wants to make any other changes to the CDC’s recommendations, he’ll just do it.”
How safe is the food supply after federal cutbacks? Experts are worried (NPR). “Paula Soldner took the Trump administration up on its offer of early retirement, joining an exodus from the Food Safety and Inspection Service that began under President Biden’s reorganization of the agency last year,” writes Yuki Noguchi. “Soldner, who also chairs the National Joint Council of Food Inspection Locals, says remaining inspectors must now visit eight facilities — double the usual number — each day. That’s not possible, she says, so it’s unclear how much food is legitimately earning that stamp of approval. ‘Did that plant receive that daily inspection from inspection personnel? In my mind, that’s a huge question mark,’ Soldner says. She says further staff retirements, hostility toward federal workers, and plummeting morale are creating conditions that make consumers more vulnerable to outbreaks of foodborne illness. Experts who study the nation’s food supply say the safety of everything we eat is called into question because of massive cuts by the Trump administration to the three federal agencies charged with monitoring it: the Food and Drug Administration, the Department of Agriculture, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”
***
Why you should upgrade to a paid subscription to Food Fix
Become a paid subscriber to unlock access to two newsletters each week, packed with insight, analysis and exclusive reporting on what’s happening in food, in Washington and beyond. You’ll also get full access to the Food Fix archive — a great way to get smart on all things food policy.
Expense it: Most paid subscribers expense their subscriptions through work. It’s worth asking!
Discounts: We also offer discounts for government, academia and students. See our subscription options. Individuals who participate in SNAP or other federal nutrition programs qualify for a free Food Fix subscription — just email info@foodfix.co.
Get the Friday newsletter: If someone forwarded you this email, sign yourself up for the free Friday edition of Food Fix. You can also follow Food Fix on X, Bluesky and LinkedIn.
See you next week!
