The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement, often associated with U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as a guiding figure, is demonstrating a growing maturity in its approach to public health policy. As Secretary Kennedy enters his second year leading the nation’s public health agenda, MAHA is solidifying its influence and resources, evolving from nascent advocacy to a more established force. A recent examination by Scientific American highlighted MAHA’s significant impact, noting its success in "upending science and medicine," a consequence, the publication suggests, of the movement’s overt skepticism towards established scientific consensus and its critical stance on conventional medical practices.
Ivan Wasserman, managing partner at Amin Wasserman Gurnani LLP, offers a nuanced perspective on MAHA’s impact, particularly concerning its focus on the role of food in health. "If we define MAHA as an overall movement or concept focusing on food’s impact on health, it has had a huge impact on nutrition and supplement regulations," Wasserman stated. He points to concrete changes, including state-level regulations targeting ultra-processed foods, school lunch programs, artificial dyes, and other chemical additives in food. Beyond these regulatory shifts, Wasserman emphasizes the political potency of MAHA voters, which has compelled politicians to publicly address concerns related to food and health.
This political dimension is particularly salient as the nation approaches the 2026 midterm elections. Republicans are reportedly eyeing the demographic often referred to as "MAHA Moms" for crucial votes. Polling data suggests that approximately 40% of parents align with the MAHA agenda, indicating a significant political base whose turnout could be critical in an election cycle where incumbent parties often face considerable headwinds.
The influence of MAHA is further amplified by recent political developments. The Trump administration’s declared support for glyphosate, a substance widely opposed by proponents of the MAHA agenda and by former iterations of RFK Jr.’s advocacy, has drawn attention. Industry observers note a growing alignment between MAHA and the broader Make America Great Again (MAGA) platform, particularly in protective measures that tend to favor large multinational corporations in the agricultural and chemical sectors, often dubbed "Big Ag," "Big Chem," and "Big Food." The elevated prominence of meat in revised dietary guidelines and the defense of glyphosate as a matter of national security illustrate the current boundaries of MAHA’s influence when it intersects with former President Trump’s overarching political objectives.
To gain deeper insights into MAHA’s trajectory and its implications for the food and supplement industries, leading legal experts in the field were consulted to provide context and identify key areas of focus as the movement continues to evolve.
Setting the MAHA Stage in 2025: A Year of Foundation-Building
Claudia Lewis of Venable LLP characterized MAHA’s initial year as primarily focused on laying the groundwork for future policy initiatives rather than immediate, sweeping overhauls of nutrition and supplement regulations. She cited FDA announcements regarding the phased elimination of certain petroleum-derived synthetic color additives in food and a heightened focus on the safety of infant formula and toddler milk as examples of this preparatory phase.
"In the first year, there certainly has been a flurry of pronouncements and promises, but other than the new food pyramid, which isn’t really a regulation, there haven’t been many significant regulatory changes, which isn’t surprising as such changes take time," Wasserman echoed, corroborating the assessment of 2025 as a year for signaling future directions.
The past year has clarified that while federal pronouncements often serve as platforms for political posturing and the exploration of new policy ideas, significant regulatory action is frequently unfolding at the state level. This decentralized approach may be a strategic maneuver to mitigate the immediate impact of large industry lobbies by allowing states to enact legislation, such as those passed in Texas, while maintaining a more collaborative stance at the federal level.
"It’s notable that roughly three dozen states have introduced legislation aimed at restricting certain synthetic additives and high-sugar products in schools and other child-focused settings, and at strengthening on-pack or menu labeling requirements for foods and supplements," Lewis observed. She anticipates that state legislatures will continue to advance bills that limit food additives in school meals, mandate new disclosures, or require on-pack warnings.
New Jersey has emerged as a recent example of this state-level strategy, proposing annual reporting of new Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) determinations, including details on intended use, safety data, and the basis for such conclusions.
Two pivotal developments for MAHA in 2025 were anticipated to be progress on issues related to synthetic dyes and the practice of self-affirmed GRAS status. Justin Prochnow of Greenberg Traurig LLP indicated that the phasing out of synthetic dyes has considerable momentum. "It really is the least controversial of all of the MAHA items," he remarked, "as most people don’t likely believe that synthetic color dyes are a good thing."
Regarding GRAS, this remains a key area of focus for 2026. However, Prochnow highlights a critical challenge: "The FDA used to require submissions of GRAS notifications until such a backlog developed that it became voluntary at the end of 1997, beginning of 1998. Now, all of a sudden, FDA will have more ability to review mandatory notifications? That seems unlikely." The industry will be closely monitoring these developments to assess their impact on innovation and the time it takes to bring new products to market.
The MAHA Watchlist for 2026: Emerging Regulatory Frontiers
Wasserman anticipates a potentially intense period for regulatory activity in the coming two years, describing it as possibly the busiest he has witnessed in over three decades of practice. He is forecasting the potential emergence of proposed rules to eliminate the self-affirmed GRAS pathway, the release of long-awaited final guidance on new dietary ingredient notifications, and new restrictions on caffeine labeling.
Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) are rapidly becoming a significant area of contention. In 2025, the FDA and USDA jointly issued a request for information to aid in defining UPFs, and this issue has garnered unexpected support from various quarters. A recent segment on 60 Minutes featured an interview with RFK Jr. alongside former FDA Commissioner David Kessler, a vocal critic of the supplement industry, both united in their concerns about UPFs. The prospect of class-action lawsuits also looms large.
"UPFs are turning into a combined effort and focus of the administration and class-action plaintiff lawyers," Prochnow noted. "The more that RFK Jr. and the administration talk about UPFs and how bad they are, the more the plaintiff lawyers latch onto it."
The FDA’s Human Foods Program included modernizing oversight of dietary supplements in its 2026 priority list, signaling increased attention from MAHA advocates. Legal experts are bracing for potential impacts on this sector. "FDA stated that it will ‘continue to support dietary supplement priorities with targeted enforcement strategies on violative products,’" Wasserman quoted. "While their plans are obviously and intentionally vague at this point, the hope is FDA will embark on a path to regulatory changes that will end in a smart, balanced approach to level the playing field against bad actors and keep safe, effective and compliant supplements available to consumers."
MAHA’s emphasis on longevity and cellular health, specifically mitochondria, brings peptides into Prochnow’s area of concern. "I think FDA will need to weigh in on the regulation and sale of peptides in a non-drug context," he stated. "There are many companies out there marketing peptides like BPC-157 and others as non-drug products labeled as ‘For Research Purposes Only’ when that is not the case. With the popularity of GLP-1 drugs and other peptides, the FDA is likely going to need to opine on this growing category."
Will MAHA Prove a Net Positive for the Supplement Industry?
Predicting the precise trajectory of a movement as it matures is inherently complex, akin to forecasting the behavior of a young child. Nevertheless, an analysis of the unfolding regulatory landscape surrounding synthetic dyes, UPFs, GRAS, and supplement oversight suggests reasons for cautious optimism regarding MAHA’s potential net positive impact on the supplement industry.
"As a general rule, supplements would seem to be a category that is looked upon favorably by MAHA and RFK Jr. as alternatives to prescription drugs," Prochnow commented, "but the regulatory and enforcement focus continues to be on synthetic colors, added sugars and UPFs." This observation reflects a common theme: MAHA’s initial focus appears directed at perceived "villains" in the food supply, with supplements awaiting more definitive federal endorsement.
Wasserman concurs, stating, "I haven’t seen evidence yet of RFK or the MAHA movement in general being big champions of the supplement industry, with the main focus seemingly on encouraging more consumption of whole foods."
From a broader perspective, MAHA could serve as a catalyst for much-needed improvements to the regulatory framework that has governed the supplement industry under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) for over three decades. "DSHEA was passed long ago, so it’s time for it to be re-evaluated and updated so that it aligns more directly with how consumers understand and use supplements," Lewis suggested. "This administration has several initiatives, which is a good start. Whether it proves to be a net positive or negative will largely depend on how the framework and the specific proposals are implemented in practice. It certainly has the potential to be positive."
The ongoing evolution of the MAHA movement, its engagement with scientific and political discourse, and its impact on state and federal regulatory bodies present a dynamic and closely watched landscape for both consumers and industry stakeholders. The coming years will be crucial in determining whether MAHA’s influence leads to a more robust, transparent, and health-conscious food and supplement ecosystem.