Latest / U.S. Right to Know articles / Americans for Ingredient Transparency: Product defense for unhealthy ultra-processed foods

Transcript

Americans for Ingredient Transparency: Product defense for unhealthy ultra-processed foods · U.S. Right to Know articles

Ultra-processed food and agribusiness companies have launched a new organization, <a href="https://americansforingredienttransparency.com/">Americans for Ingredient Transparency</a>, to counteract efforts by the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) coalition and others to improve the quality of America’s food supply. AFIT is funded by large ultra-processed food and beverage companies, including General Mills, Kraft Heinz, Nestlé, Tyson Foods, Coca-Cola, and PepsiCo, and more than a dozen food industry trade associations. These companies appear to be using the deceptively named Americans for Ingredient Transparency not to promote transparency but rather to federally pre-empt tough new state-level food safety laws. Their main purpose seems to be product defense for  <a href="https://usrtk.org/ultra-processed-foods/cancer-diabetes-dementia-depression-early-death/">unhealthy</a> <a href="https://usrtk.org/ultra-processed-foods/early-death/">ultra</a>-<a href="https://usrtk.org/ultra-processed-foods/addictive/">processed</a> <a href="https://usrtk.org/ultra-processed-foods/cancer/">food</a> and many of <a href="https://usrtk.org/sweeteners/sucralose-emerging-science-reveals-health-risks/">its</a> <a href="https://usrtk.org/chemicals/titanium-dioxide/">unsafe</a> <a href="https://usrtk.org/sweeteners/aspartame_health_risks/">artificial</a> <a href="https://usrtk.org/healthwire/propylparaben-may-harm-female-fertility-across-generations/">additives</a>.<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-funded-by-giant-food-corporations-and-their-trade-groups">Funded by giant food corporations and their trade groups</h2>Americans for Ingredient Transparency is backed by dozens of ultra-processed food and beverage companies, related trade associations, and growers groups for commodities used in ultra-processed foods. Big Food backers listed on AFIT’s <a href="https://americansforingredienttransparency.com/">website</a> include The Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, Nestlé, General Mills, Kraft Heinz, Tyson Foods, Conagra Brands, Keurig Dr. Pepper, Hormel Foods, Ocean Spray, Ken’s, McCormick, Sargento, Sysco, and Enterprises Inc. baked foods conglomerate. Trade groups backing AFIT include the American Bakers Association, American Beverage, American Frozen Food Institute, Consumer Brands Association (formerly the <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/grocery-manufacturers-association/">Grocery Manufacturers Association</a>), FMI: The Food Industry Association, Independent Bakers Association, Meat Institute, National Association of Manufacturers, National Restaurant Association, National Retail Federation, North American Millers Association, and SNAC: Snacking, Nutrition and Convenience International.Trade groups representing commodities for ultra-processed foods include the Corn Refiners Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, and American Soybean Association, among others.<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-top-advisors-are-a-pesticide-defender-and-a-lobbyist">Top advisors are a pesticide defender and a lobbyist</h2>The AFIT website lists two “Senior Advisors” with histories of defending health-harming companies that want to avoid scrutiny and regulation.Julie Gunlock is director of the Independent Women’s Forum (IWF), a group that partnered with Monsanto to defend pesticides and received funding from tobacco companies but <a href="http://tobacco.cleartheair.org.hk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/IWF-shills.pdf">did not disclose that funding</a> even as it promoted tobacco products. This is a classic front group tactic in which corporations argue for deregulation through the voices of third party allies who do not disclose their corporate funding. Altria, the parent company of Philip Morris USA, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2019/jan/23/free-market-thinktanks-tobacco-control-polices-database#0/?freedom-foundation">funded IWF</a> in 2016 and 2017. In early 2018, Gunlock testified on behalf of IWF to an FDA advisory committee arguing that Phillip Morris’ e-cigarettes <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Testimony-Before-FDA-Advisory-Committee-Independent-Women.pdf">are beneficial to women</a> and the FDA should approve them.  Gunlock and IWF partnered with Monsanto in 2017 on a “Food and Fear” lecture series that encouraged women to ignore “alarmist” concerns about toxic chemicals in food. That same year, <a href="http://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/IWF-proposal-to-Monsanto-.pdf">IWF asked Monsanto</a> for $43,000 to fund a “Super Women of Science” series designed to undercut support for a California law to label toxic chemicals in food and consumer products.<figure class="wp-block-image aligncenter size-full"><a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/food-and-fear.png"><img src="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/food-and-fear.png" alt="" class="wp-image-24299"/></a></figure>Gunlock is a leading public voice at IWF promoting and defending corporate products including <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/09/setting-the-record-straight-on-vaping/">vaping</a>, <a href="https://nypost.com/2015/10/30/dont-be-afraid-to-let-your-kids-gorge-on-halloween-sweets/">sugary sweets</a>, <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Are-Plastic-Products-Costing-You-Your-Sex-Drive-Independent-Women.pdf">chemicals in plastics</a>, <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/GMOs-Can-Help-World-Hunger-Independent-Women.pdf">genetically modified foods (GMOs)</a>, and <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Viewpoint-Eat-1500-strawberries-in-one-sitting%E2%80%94and-pesticides-still-wont-harm-you-Genetic-Liter.pdf">pesticides</a>. She dismisses concerns about pesticides as “<a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Debunking-Agriculture-Alarmism-Pesticides-Independent-Women.pdf">agriculture alarmism</a>.” Her writing ignores the ample <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/glyphosate-health-concerns/">scientific evidence</a> linking glyphosate to cancer and other health concerns, and <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Glyphosate-in-Cereal-Another-Myth-Promoted-by-Unethical-Green-Groups-Independent-Women.pdf">claims inaccurately</a> that glyphosate in foods does not pose “any sort of risk to consumers—including kids.” IWF has even argued that it is necessary to <a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Bugged-by-Junk-Science-Independent-Women.pdf">keep chlorpyrifos</a> on the market despite strong scientific evidence linking the pesticide to <a href="https://usrtk.org/pesticides/chlorpyrifos/">brain damage in children</a>.   As of 2022, <a href="https://sfofexposed.org/independent-womens-forum/">top IWF funders</a> were right-wing foundations that work to expand corporate power, including the <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Diana_Davis_Spencer_Foundation">Diana Davis Spencer Foundation</a>, <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Randolph_Foundation">Randolph Foundation</a>, <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Lynde_and_Harry_Bradley_Foundation">Bradley Foundation</a> and <a href="https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=DonorsTrust">Donors Trust</a>, a secretive fund connected to anti-regulation activists Charles and David Koch that has been described as the “<a href="http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/donors-trust-donor-capital-fund-dark-money-koch-bradley-devos/">dark money ATM</a> of the conservative movement” because it channels money from anonymous donors, including corporations, to front groups and other efforts that advance corporate agendas. IWF does not disclose its funders but researchers have also found <a href="https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5716244/">evidence of tobacco industry grants</a> to IWF from 1998-2000.In 2022, IWF <a href="https://apps.irs.gov/pub/epostcard/cor/541670627_202212_990_2023111621945672.pdf">spent $5.7 million</a> on programs that purport to “expand women’s options and opportunities.” In practice, the group defends toxic products and downplays legitimate health concerns for women and children as “alarmism.” Gunlock promotes this theme through her book “From Cupcakes to Chemicals: How the Culture of Alarmism Makes Us Afraid of Everything and How to Fight Back,” which attacks “food nannies, public health officials, politicians and government regulators” for efforts to rein in corporations and reduce toxic exposures.  Andy Koenig, senior advisor to Americans for Ingredient Transparency, is a founding partner of <a href="https://www.kwinn.com/">Kwinn Consulting</a>, a Washington, DC–based lobbying and political advisory firm that helps clients “shape public policy, legislation, rule-making, elections, and non-profit activism,” according to its website. Services include drafting legislation, providing political intelligence, researching the opposition, connecting clients with elected officials, and crafting strategies to influence public opinion.Kwinn Consulting does not list its clients but it appears to be well connected to Republicans and the Trump Administration. Koenig served as special assistant to the president for the White House Office of Legislative Affairs during Donald Trump’s first presidency, as well as policy director at the House Republican Conference, and senior policy advisor to then-Representative Mike Pence (R-IN). Koenig is also listed as vice president for policy at Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, a “major political operation spearheaded by billionaire Charles Koch to organize his billionaire allies and distribute funds to influence elections and public policy,” <a href="https://www.desmog.com/freedom-partners/">according to DeSmog</a>. <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/koch-brothers-990-filing-215979">Politico</a> has identified the group as “the central group in the increasingly powerful network of conservative public policy and political groups helmed by the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch.”<h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-aiming-to-strike-down-pro-consumer-state-food-laws-nbsp-nbsp">Aiming to strike down pro-consumer state food laws  </h2>AFIT’s corporate sponsors appear to be using the group to defend profitable ultra-processed foods by pushing federal legislation to replace stronger state food laws with weaker uniform national standards for food safety and transparency.Their plan would centralize decisions about food safety and labeling under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which has a long history of corporate capture and weak food industry regulation. Stronger state laws for food safety and labeling, AFIT claims, “create confusion” and “limit choices” for consumers. The ultra-processed food industry unveiled AFIT in October 2025 following state-level victories for food safety, including a California law that <a href="https://www.gov.ca.gov/2025/10/08/governor-newsom-signs-first-in-the-nation-law-to-ban-ultra-processed-foods-from-school-lunches/">bans ultra-processed foods</a> from school lunches, a West Virginia law that <a href="https://governor.wv.gov/article/governor-patrick-morrisey-signs-food-dye-legislation-law">prohibits certain synthetic dyes</a> from school lunches (with a statewide ban to follow), and a Texas law <a href="https://www.powershealth.org/about-us/newsroom/health-library/2025/06/24/new-texas-law-could-change-how-food-additives-are-labeled-nationwide">requiring warning labels</a> on foods containing ingredients banned in other countries for health reasons. Other states are considering similar laws to restrict unhealthy ultra-processed food or specific artificial ingredients, or enhance consumers’ right to know. Besides federal preemption of state laws, AFIT is aiming to overhaul the GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) process that allows food manufacturers to add chemicals or additives to foods without the FDA’s prior approval if the substance is deemed safe by experts chosen by the companies. Reforming GRAS is a priority of the MAHA coalition and many other health groups.  <h2 class="wp-block-heading" id="h-further-reading">Further reading</h2>U.S. Right to Know has <a href="https://usrtk.org/category/industry-pr/">reported extensively</a> on food and pesticide industry trade groups, front groups and other third-party allies these industries use to <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto/glyphosate-science-denial/">deny science</a>, avoid regulation, and keep consumers in the dark about harmful products. See our reporting on the Independent Women’s Forum and related corporate-led efforts to undermine public health advocacy to reduce toxic chemicals and pesticides in food.<li><a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-politics-of-infertility-and-cancer_b_5a1d9f5ae4b0e6631c44bbc4">The Politics of Infertility and Cancer</a>, by Stacy Malkan, HuffPost, November 2017. This article reports on IWF’s 2017 gala sponsored by the American Chemistry Council, Phillip Morris, the cosmetics industry trade group and other corporations. </li><li><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/independent-womens-forum-kochs-2498479784.html">Pushing Toxic Chemicals and Climate Denial: The Dark-Money Funded Independent Women’s Forum</a>, by Stacy Malkan, EcoWatch, October 2017. </li><li><a href="https://usrtk.org/news-releases/new-report-reveals-pesticide-industrys-disinformation-and-science-denial-playbook/">Merchants of Poison: How Monsanto Sold the World on a Toxic Pesticide</a>: Our 2022 report based on internal Monsanto documents shows how pesticide companies deployed female writers and women’s groups, including the Independent Women’s Forum, to <a href="https://usrtk.org/monsanto/attacks-on-scientists-journalists/#attackorganicmoms">attack “organic moms”</a> who are concerned about pesticide exposures.  </li><li><a href="https://usrtk.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/SpinningFoodReport_2015.pdf">Spinning Food: How Food Industry Front Groups and Covert Communications are Shaping the Story of Food</a>: Our 2015 report with Friends of the Earth documents tens of millions of dollars in spending by food and pesticide companies to shape public opinion, and describes their efforts to woo women, co-opt female bloggers and deploy messaging to frame organic shoppers as elitist bullies (page 21).  </li>Stay up to date with our investigations and the latest public health news. <a href="https://usrtk.org/sign-up/">Sign up</a> for the Right to Know newsletter.