By Sabrina Siddiqui
WASHINGTON -- When Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. summoned infant-formula executives to Washington last spring, he arrived with a list of questions about seed oils, heavy metals and how U.S. formula stacks up against Europe's.
Kennedy's concerns echoed those of parents aligned with the "Make America Healthy Again" movement as he prepared to launch "Operation Stork Speed," the Trump administration's sweeping review of U.S. formula ingredients.
Nearly a year later, the administration is unlikely to act on some of the more contentious priorities championed by MAHA activists, such as calling for the removal of seed oils from formula, according to people familiar with the matter. Since launching its review, the first federal effort of its kind in decades, the administration has grappled with the practicalities of overhauling one of the most tightly regulated sectors of the U.S. food industry, the people said.
Kennedy's emphasis on infant formula has led to a dynamic that has become common in his first year leading the nation's health agenda: The political demands of the MAHA movement have come up against industry warnings that sweeping changes to infant-formula standards risk negative consequences if not rooted in science.
When Operation Stork Speed was announced last spring, a flurry of activity followed. Industry groups met with regulators, a Food and Drug Administration panel convened in June and hundreds of responses were submitted to a 120-day public comment period that closed in September.
There is little disagreement among policymakers, manufacturers and doctors that a re-examination of federal nutrient requirements for infant formula is long overdue. For the first six months of life, most babies rely on formula, breast milk or both as their only source of nutrition, and it typically remains their main source of calories and nutrients through the first year.
"Operation Stork Speed brings infant formula regulations into the 2020s, " said Tom Brenna, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Texas at Austin Dell Medical School who took part in an FDA panel of nutritionists and scientists last summer. "The nutrition of every bottle-fed infant in America is at stake."
But industry representatives and pediatric experts who have consulted with the administration on the initiative say communication has slowed and visibility into the process has been limited.
"We expected there would be more follow up," said Steven Abrams, who is also a professor of pediatrics at the University of Texas at Austin and participated in the FDA panel. "But really, not a whole lot has happened."
An HHS spokesman said Operation Stork Speed remained "a top priority" for the administration and that more updates would be shared "as they become available."
The FDA is reviewing science and policies related to infant formula, and results of that work is expected to be revealed this spring, people familiar with the matter said.
Kennedy has said the FDA plans to release study results in April examining contaminants in formula and suggested the current list of required nutrients is outdated. "That list is 30 years old, and it's not based on good science. It's archaic science," he said at a recent event in Harrisburg, Pa.
FDA Commissioner Marty Makary last summer told Fox News that "moms want baby formula without seed oil, without corn syrup, without added sugar, without arsenic and lead and other heavy metals."
Some physician-advocacy groups and industry representatives have since questioned whether the administration's approach will be grounded in scientific consensus.
Formula manufacturers say they use seed oils because they provide key fats babies need to grow, including linoleic acid -- a nutrient that is also found in breast milk and required in all formulas. Many doctors say it would be difficult to swap out seed oils, which are also used in European formula, and long regarded as safe, for other sources of those same nutrients.
A Consumer Reports review of 41 types of powdered infant formula last year found that about half contained detectable levels of contaminants such as arsenic, lead and "forever chemicals" known as PFAS. Physicians say trace amounts of substances such as arsenic are commonly found in many foods, and stricter FDA limits introduced in 2023 make products more likely to be flagged as elevated today.
Mead Johnson, an infant-formula maker, launched a website in August addressing common questions about ingredients, including seed oils, and explaining differences between U.S. and European regulatory standards. Other formula companies, such as Bobbie, have promoted "European-style" formulas in part to appeal to skeptical parents.
U.S. standards call for higher iron levels to prevent deficiency, while the European Union requires more DHA, a nutrient that isn't mandated by the FDA but can be found in most U.S. formulas.
A spokesman for Abbott Laboratories, a formula maker, said the company supports the government's efforts "to deliver a national strategy that prioritizes infant health, safety and a resilient domestic manufacturing supply."
A string of baby-formula recalls has sparked more urgency.
Nestlé and Danone recently widened a global recall of batches of formula, mostly in Europe, because of the potential presence of cereulide bacteria. Those incidents came after formula maker ByHeart recalled all of its products in the U.S. last fall after they were linked to a multistate botulism outbreak.
Abrams said such events demonstrate why the administration needs to move more swiftly.
"There's a need for them to get this show back on the road," he said.
Write to Sabrina Siddiqui at sabrina.siddiqui@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
February 16, 2026 21:00 ET (02:00 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Comments