>> NOW, THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION HAS RELEASED A PLAN TO IMPROVE CHILDREN'S HEALTH.

128 RECOMMENDATIONS ADDRESS EVERYTHING FROM VACCINES TO THE TYPE OF MILK SERVED IN SCHOOLS.

IT'S ALL PART OF HEALTH SECRETARY ROBERT F. KENNEDY'S PUSH TO MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY AGAIN.

ACCORDING TO OUR NEXT GUEST, SOME PARTS OF THE REPORT ARE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN.

SUSAN MAYNE IS A PROFESSOR AT YALE AND THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY AND APPLIED NUTRITION AT THE FDA.

SHE JOINS HARI SREENIVASAN TO DISCUSS WHERE SHE BELIEVES THE STRATEGY SUCCEEDS AND WHERE IT FALLS SHORT.

>> BIANNA, THANK YOU.

DR.

MAYNE, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US.

JUST LAST WEEK, ROBERT F. KENNEDY JR.

UNVEILED HIS MAKE AMERICA HEALTHY STRATEGY DOCUMENT, IT HAS 128 DIFFERENT RECOMMENDATIONS IN IT.

YOU'RE SOMEONE WHO IS INTIMATELY FAMILIAR WITH HOW THE FDA WORKS AND YOU'RE NOW IN PUBLIC HEALTH.

WHAT WERE YOUR FIRST IMPRESSIONS?

>> MY INITIAL IMPRESSIONS ARE THEY'VE IDENTIFIED A REALLY IMPORTANT PUBLIC HEALTH PROBLEM IN THIS COUNTRY THAT'S THE PROBLEM WITH CHRONIC DISEASE.

IT'S NOT JUST A PROBLEM FOR CHILDREN, IT'S A PROBLEM FOR ADULTS, AS WELL.

CHRONIC DISEASES ARE THE LARGEST CAUSES OF DEATH IN THIS COUNTRY.

CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE AND CANCER BEING NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO.

IN TERMS OF THE IMPORTANCE FOR ME IS THAT THIS REPORT HAS REALLY FOCUSED IN ON DIET AND NUTRITION, AS IMPORTANT MODIFIABLE RISK FACTORS FOR CHRONIC DISEASE, AND THAT'S AN AREA I'VE BEEN WORKING ON FOR THE LAST FOUR DECADES.

>> HE SAID HE HAD A CLAIM IN THERE THAT SAYS 76% OF AMERICANS ARE SUFFERING FROM A CHRONIC DISEASE, COMPARED WITH 11% WHEN MY UNCLE WAS PRESIDENT.

THAT STATISTIC ACCURATE?

>> I CAN'T QUOTE SPECIFIC STATISTICS, AND IT ALSO DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE INCLUDES IN TERMS OF CHRONIC DISEASE.

WHEN I THINK ABOUT CHRONIC DISEASE, MY WORK IS ON CANCER, HEART DISEASE, AND OBESITY, AND DIABETES, AND YES, THEY HAVE GONE UP IN THIS COUNTRY.

OBESITY HAS INCREASED DRAMATICALLY IN THIS COUNTRY, AND MANY OF THE CHRONIC DISEASES THAT I JUST SPOKE ABOUT ARE SPECIFICALLY RELATED TO OBESITY.

>> OKAY, SO, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES HAS BEEN THAT, YOU KNOW, IF IT'S AN ACUTE HEALTH ISSUE, WE CAN TRY TO TREAT IT WITH MEDICINE, WE CAN TRY TO HAVE INTERVENTIONS, BUT FOR CHRONIC DISEASES THAT TAKE SUCH A LONG-TERM IMPACT ON PEOPLE, HOW DO WE, YOU KNOW, RERIGHT THE SHIP, SO TO SPEAK, THE ENTIRE HEALTH INFRASTRUCTURE, TO DEAL WITH SOMETHING THAT IS KIND OF SO ENTRACTABLE FOR SO MANY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE?

>> I THINK THE IMPORTANCE OF THE REPORT IS THAT IT DOES FOCUS IN ON PREVENTION, AND PREVENTION HAS BEEN A HARD AREA TO REALLY FOCUS IN ON AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL, BECAUSE THE DIVIDENDS TAKE AWHILE TO COME IN.

BUT WE KNOW, WE HAVE TO PREVENT THESE CHRONIC DISEASES, AND FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE CHRONIC DISEASES, FOOD AND NUTRITION ARE IMPORTANT THINGS TO HELP MANAGE THOSE CHRONIC DISEASES.

THERE'S REALLY EXCITING RESEARCH SHOWING THAT YOU CAN EVEN REVERSE DISEASES LIKE TYPE II DIABETES WITH FOOD, NUTRITION, LIFESTYLE INTERVENTIONS.

SO, IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT PRIORITY, FOCUSING ON PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF CHRONIC DISEASE, AND FOOD AND NUTRITION ARE REALLY IMPORTANT TOOLS TO DO JUST THAT.

>> WHEN WE TALK ABOUT FOOD AND NUTRITION, ONE OF THE REPORT'S PROPOSALS IS TO DEFINE ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS.

AND I GUESS WE KIND OF HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT IS, BUT WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO TRY TO GET A DEFINITION OUT?

>> IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO GET A DEFINITION OUT.

ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS HAVE BEEN VERY DIFFICULT TO AGREE ON WHAT THAT DEFINITION SHOULD BE.

THERE HAVE BEEN DEFINITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN USED FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES, SUCH AS THE NOVA CLASSIFICATION, BUT WE KNOW THEY'RE OVERLY BROAD.

AND THE OTHER THING THAT WE KNOW IS THAT IT TENDS TO INCLUDE FOODS AS BEING ULTRA PROCESSED THAT ARE ACTUALLY NOT HARMFUL FOR OUR HEALTH AND MAY BE BENEFICIAL, SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY MAY INCLUDE AN ADDITIVE, FOR EXAMPLE.

SO, IF THE GOVERNMENT WANTS TO TAKE A REGULATORY STEP ON ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS, THEY NEED TO DEFINE WHAT THAT MEANS.

STATES HAVE TRIED TO DO THAT, BY SAY, LET'S FIGURE OUT WHAT PARTICULARLY HARMFUL ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS ARE, THEY TEND TO BE THE ONES WE SAY ARE JUNK FOODS, PEOPLE WOULD AGREE THOSE ARE PROBLEMATIC.

BUT WHAT ABOUT WHOLE WHEAT BREADS AND SERIALS THAT ARE CAPTURED UNDER THE ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS CATEGORIZATION, THAT ARE ASSOCIATE WITH REDUCTIONS IN THINGS LIKE COLON CANCER.

>> EACH OF THE FOODS THAT MIGHT BE IN THIS CATEGORY WOULD PROBABLY HAVE A VERY POWERFUL LOBBY TRYING TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT LEDGE SLATED OUT OR REGULATED INTO WHATEVER THE RULES ARE.

DECREASING ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS WAS KIND OF ONE OF THE CENTRAL IDEAS OF THE SECRETARY'S SUPPORTERS EARLY IN THIS ADMINISTRATION, AND I WONDER, I MEAN, AS I LOOK THROUGH THE STRATEGY, I DON'T SEE THAT MANY SPECIFICS ON EXACTLY HOW TO TACKLE IT, BESIDES TRYING TO DEFINE IT.

>> I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU.

AND THAT WAS EXACTLY MY REACTION, AS WELL.

CLEARLY, THERE IS A COMMITMENT TO TRY TO REDUCE ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS IN THE UNITED STATES, AND YOU SEE LANGUAGE ABOUT PROVIDING HEALTHY, WHOLE FOODS TO CONSUMERS ACROSS DIFFERENT SECTORS, FROM THE WOMEN, INFANT, AND CHILDREN PROGRAM, THROUGH THE SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

SO, THAT'S A LAUDABLE GOAL, TO REDUCE CON SEMISHUN OF FOODS, PROVIDE FRESH, WHOLESOME FOODS TO PEOPLE.

THE ROB IS, THERE AREN'T CLEAR POLICIES IN THE RECORD TO DO THAT.

MORE OVER, THERE ARE RESOURCE RAMIFICATIONS.

IT HAS COST IMPLICATIONS.

AND INSTEAD, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN DURING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION ARE THE BIGGEST CUTS EVER IN OUR FEDERAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.

SO, THE GOALS AND THE COMMITMENTS REALLY STAND AT ODDS WITH THE RESOURCES, AND YOU MAY HAVE NOTED WHEN YOU READ THE STRATEGY, THERE AREN'T RESOURCE COMMITMENTS IN THE REPORT.

>> YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM, THIS STRATEGY DOCUMENT SAYS IT WANTS TO GET WHOLE, HEALTHY FOOD TO SNAP PARTICIPANTS.

GIVEN THE CUTS TO SNAP, HOW LIKELY IS THAT?

>> AH, ZERO.

ZERO LIKELY.

IF YOU CUT THESE PROGRAMS, AND YOU CUT THE RESOURCES, YOUR ABILITY TO DELIVER WHOLE, HEALTHY FOODS IS SIMPLY NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

WE'VE ALSO SEEN SOME OTHER CUTS, NOT JUST TO SNAP, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE WERE PROGRAMS WHERE FARMERS COULD GET FRESH PRODUCE INTO THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS, GREAT PROGRAMS THAT SUPPORTED AGRICULTURE, SUPPORTED HEALTHY FOODS IN SCHOOLS, THOSE WERE ALSO DEFUNDED.

SO, IT WILL BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHAT RESOURCE COMMITMENTS THEY'LL BE MAKING GOING FORWARD, BUT BASED UPON WHAT'S HAPPENED SO FAR, THESE GOALS WILL NOT BE REEFED.

>> THE ORIGINAL MAHA REPORT FROM SOME MONTHS AGO IDENTIFIED FOUR POTENTIAL DRIVERS OF CHILDHOOD CHRONIC DISEASES, IT IDENTIFIED POOR DIET, AGGREGATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHEMICALS, LACK OF PHYSICAL ACTIVITY, AND MEDICALIZATION.

IS THAT A FAIR ASSESSMENT, IS THAT A DECENT SORT OF STARTING POINT?

>> WELL, MY EXPERTISE IS ON THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SIDE, BUT WHAT SHOULD BE OBVIOUS IS THAT MANY OF THE LEADING CAUSES OF DEATH IN OUR YOUTH, SUCH AS FIREARM INJURIES, ARE NOT MENTIONED.

ALSO TOBACCO AND ALCOHOL ARE NOT ADDRESSED IN THE REPORT.

SPECIFICALLY, AND SO, THOSE ARE IMPORTANT CAUSES OF CHRONIC DISEASE IN OUR COUNTRY, AS WELL, SO -- THERE CERTAINLY ARE SOME THINGS THAT ARE NOT MENTIONED IN THE REPORT, THE PUBLIC HEALTH OFFICIALS WOULD PRIORITIZE IN SUCH A REPORT.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THIS STRATEGY TRIES TO LAY OUT, AND I THINK THAT YOU HAVE AN EXPERTISE ON IS SORT OF DIETARY GUIDELINES.

IS THE UNITED STATES GOING TO REVISIT, SO TO SPEAK, WHAT WE CONSIDER THE BARE MINIMUM OR THE OPTIMAL TYPE OF DIET THAT AMERICANS SHOULD BE HAVING?

>> I'M GLAD YOU ASKED ME ABOUT THE DIETARY GUIDELINES.

JUST A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, THEY'RE ISSUED EVERY FIVE YEARS.

THAT'S REQUIRED BY CONGRESS, AND SO, THAT HAS TO HAPPEN EVERY FIVE YEARS.

THE PROCESS INVOLVES A VERY TRANSPARENT PUBLIC-FACING PROCESS, RESEARCH QUESTIONS ARE IDENTIFIED, NUTRITION EVIDENCE REVIEWS ARE PREPARED AND CONSOLIDATED.

PUBLIC MEETINGS ARE HELD.

THEN A DIETARY GUIDELINES ADVISELY COMMITTEE TAKES TWO YEARS TO REVIEW ALL THAT SCIENCE AND PRODUCE A SCIENTIFIC REPORT CALLED THE DIETARY GUIDELINES ADVISORY COMMITTEE REPORT.

AND THAT REPORT WAS RELEASED NEAR THE END OF THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION.

AND THAT -- THAT'S THE WAY IT WORKS.

AND THEN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TAKES THAT REPORT AND COMES UP WITH THE DIETARY GUIDELINES FOR AMERICANS.

AND SO, THIS ADMINISTRATION NEEDS TO DO THAT BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR.

WE HAVE HEARD SECRETARY KENNEDY SAY THAT THOSE SHOULD BE FORTHCOMING IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

WHAT I AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT, THOUGH, IS THAT SOME OF THE STATEMENTS IN THE ACTUAL STRATEGY ABOUT THE DIETARY GUIDELINES PROCESS ARE CONCERNING.

AND THEY TALK ABOUT REVISITING THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THEY TALK ABOUT REVISITING HOW THAT SCIENCE IS LOOKED AT AND HOW THE PROCESS UNFOLDS.

THAT PROCESS HAS BEEN LOOKED AT OVER AND OVER AGAIN WITH A LOT OF INPUT FROM CONGRESS, AND I'M CONCERNED THAT WE MAY SEE SOME DISRUPTION TO A VERY SCIENCE-BASED TRANSPARENT PROCESS BY THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, WHICH WE HAVE SEEN WITH THE VACCINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE, SO, THAT CONCERNS ME.

THE OTHER POINT I'LL MAKE IS THAT I FULLY EXPECT THAT THE DIETARY GUIDELINES THAT WILL BE COMING MAY DEVIATE FROM SOME OF THAT SCIENCE THAT IS TICULATED IN THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

AND WE'VE SEEN THAT IN THE STRATEGY REPORT, FOR EXAMPLE, LANGUAGE ABOUT REMOVING RESTRICTIONS ON SATURATED FAT.

THAT WAS MENTIONED.

WE'VE ALSO SEEN HIGHER PROFILE TO MEAT IN THIS STRATEGY REPORT, IT'S MENTIONED SEVERAL TIMES IN THE STRATEGY.

BUT THERE'S NO MENTION OF POULTRY OR FISH OR PLANT PROTEINS, SO, I THINK THAT FORESHADOWS SOME OF WHAT WE MAY BE SEEING COMING WITH THE DIETARY GUIDELINES.

>> ONE OF THE OTHER AREAS THAT I THINK YOU'D BE QUALIFIED TO TALK ABOUT IS MICROBIAL FOOD SAFETY.

WE DON'T NECESSARILY THINK ABOUT IT, UNFORTUNATELY, WE THINK ABOUT IT ONLY IN THE CONTEXT OF WHEN SOMETHING GOES WRONG AND WE HEAR ABOUT SOMETHING ON THE NEWS.

BUT WHAT THOSE KIND OF CHANGES TO THIS THAT YOU'RE CONCERNED ABOUT?

>> IT REALLY HAS NOT RECEIVED MUCH ATTENTION FROM THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION IN TERMS OF PROMOTING THAT WE NEED TO DO MORE HERE.

INSTEAD, WHAT WE HAVE SEEN ARE STEPS BY THE ADMINISTRATION TO ACTUALLY UNDERMINE MICROBIAL FOOD SAFETY.

A FEW EXAMPLES INCLUDE DISMANTLING AN ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT'S BEEN IN EXISTENCE CALLED THE NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MORE MICROBIOLOGICAL CRITERIA IN FOOD.

THEY WERE WORKING ON A REQUEST THAT WE PUT FORWARD WHEN I WAS AT THE FDA ON HOW TO PREVENT BACTERIAL INFECTION OF INFANT FORMULA, BECAUSE THAT LED TO THE MASSIVE RECALL IN INFANT FORMULA SHORTAGES.

SO, WE HAD A COMMITTEE WORKING ON THAT.

THAT GROUP DISBANDED RIGHT BEFORE THE RELEASE OF THAT REPORT AND IT HAS NOT SEEN THE LIGHT OF DAY.

WE'VE SEEN CHANGES TO OUR FOOD BORNE ILLNESS SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS, THAT WAS OUR NATIONAL SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM THAT USED TO CAPTURE DATA ON EIGHT DIFFERENT PATHOGENS, THEY HAVE NOW SAID THEY ARE REDUCING THAT TO JUST TWO, SALMONELLA AND E. COLI, BECAUSE OF LACK OF RESOURCES.

SO, THERE ARE OTHER CHANGES, AS WELL.

BUT I THINK THAT AN IMPORTANT POINT IS WHEN WE THINK ABOUT KNEW NUTRITION, WE REALLY HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO FOOD SAFETY AND MICROBIAL FOOD SAFETY, BECAUSE IF WE'RE PROMOTING THINGS LIKE FRUITS AND VEGETABLES AND LEAFY GREENS AND WHOLE, FRESH FOODS, THOSE ARE THE SAME TYPES OF FOODS THAT ARE HIGHER RISK FROM A FOOD SAFETY PERSPECTIVE.

AND I'VE HEARD PEOPLE SAY TO ME, WELL, I'D RATHER GO EAT A BAG OF DORITOS BECAUSE I'M NOT GOING TO HAVE FOOD BORNE ILLNESS.

WE NEED TO ADDRESS THAT.

WE NEED TO PREVENT ILLNESSES AND CONTAMINATION OF THESE PRODUCTS, AND IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO SUPPORT A NUTRITION STAT INDUSTRY.

I LED THE CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY AND APPLIED NUTRITION, SO, I GOT TO LOOK AT THAT INTERSECTION OF FOOD SAFETY AND NUTRITION, AND THE TWO INTERSECT QUITE FREQUENTLY.

PAYING ATTENTION TO FOOD SAFETY IS IMPORTANT FOR NUTRITION, AS WELL.

>> DOCTOR, WHAT'S INTERESTING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, BESIDES TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FOOD THAT'S GOING INTO OUR BODIES IS SAFE IN THE FIRST PLACE, THERE'S ALSO SORT OF THE EXPOSURE FROM OUTSIDE, RIGHT?

I MEAN, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT KIDS ARE NOT EXPOSED TO TOXIC CHEMICALS AND SO FORTH?

AND I SEE IN THE STRATEGY DOCUMENT, THERE'S A LOT OF KIND OF EMPHASIS AND THE EPA STUDYING LOTS OF THINGS INCLUDING AIR POLLUTION AND --BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE SEE, YOU KNOW, THE OFFICE FOR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AT THE EPA HAS BEEN SHUT DOWN, SO, IT'S --I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO HOW WE WOULD TRY TO GET TO THIS HEALTHIER, HAPPIER PLACE WHILE THE FUNDS FOR SOME OF THE RESEARCH THAT WOULD BE NECESSARY TO FIND THE INFORMATION DON'T EXIST ANYMORE.

>> AND YOU'VE IDENTIFIED SOME OF THE REALLY STARK CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN WHAT'S HAPPENING IN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION AND THE STATED GOALS IN THE STRATEGY REPORT.

AND I CAN GIVE YOU ONE EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING I WORKED ON AT FDA, AND THAT'S CONTAMINATION OF FOODS WITH PFAS.

AND SO, PFAS GET INTO THE ENVIRONMENT, THEY GET INTO THE WATER, THEY GET INTO THE SOIL, AND THEN FOOD CAN TAKE THAT UP, AND WE HAVE CONTAMINATED FOOD.

SO, THE ONLY WAY TO REALLY ADDRESS IT IS TO ADDRESS THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION, AND WE WORKED HARD WITH EPA TO SET STANDARDS FOR PFAS IN WATER, TO TRY TO REDUCE THAT ENVIRONMENTAL CON CONTAMINATION, AND WHAT WE'RE SEEING IN THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION IS THOSE STANDARDS ARE BEING ROLLED BACK, SO, AGAIN, IT'S JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE, WHERE THE GOALS IN THE REPORT AND THE STRATEGY, THOSE GOALS ARE REALLY SPOT- ON, BUT THE ACTIONS THE ADMINISTRATION IS TAKING ARE THE OPPOSITE, AND ARE GOING TO REALLY IMPAIR THEIR ABILITY TO MEET ANY OF THOSE GOALS.

>> SO, HOW DO WE GET FROM KIND OF THIS IDEA OF A STRATEGY DOCUMENT TO ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING IT?

LET'S TAKE FOR EXAMPLE, ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS, IF THE DEFINITION IS THE ONLY THING THAT THE STRATEGY IS CALLING FOR, WHAT DO WE DO BETWEEN NOW AND WHENEVER THAT TIME IS?

>> THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, BECAUSE I REALLY THINK WE NEED AS URGENT ACTION RIGHT NOW ON ULTRA POSSESSED FOODS.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE SOME TIME TO COME UP WITH A DEFINITION THAT CAN BE USED FOR REGULATORY PURPOSES, AND WE NEED ACTION NOW.

SO, WHAT I WOULD RECOMMEND IS THAT THEY REALLY FOCUS IN ON THE COMPONENTS OF ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS THAT WE KNOW ARE DAMAGING TO HEALTH.

AND I'M TALKING ABOUT TOO MUCH SODIUM, TOO SUCH SUGAR, TOO MUCH SATURATED FAT.

THERE ARE STEPS THE ADMINISTRATION COULD TAKE RIGHT NOW, CONTINUE PROMOTING SODIUM REDUCTION IN OUR FOOD SUPPLY.

PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE THERE.

CONTINUE WORKING ON SUGAR REDUCTION.

SATURATED FAT REDUCTION.

FRONT OF PACK NUTRITION LABELING WAS PROPOSED, BUT NOT YET FINALIZED, SO GETTING THAT INFORMATION RIGHT ON THE FRONT OF PACKAGES.

AND I'VE MENTIONED SOME LABELING IDEAS, BECAUSE LABELING NOT ONLY INFORMS CONSUMERS, BUT IT ALSO DRIVES INDUSTRY TO REFORM LATE PRODUCTS TO BE HEALTHIER.

WHEN FDA MANDATED TRANSFAT LABELING ON THE NUTRITION FACTS LABEL SOME YEARS AGO, EXPOSURE DROPPED BY 80%, AND THAT'S BECAUSE CONSUMERS STARTED AVOIDING PRODUCTS WITH TRANSFAT AND INDUSTRY REFORMULATED.

SO, THERE'S MANY STEPS, THESE AND OTHERS, THAT THE GOVERNMENT COULD CERTAINLY TAKE RIGHT NOW TO START ADDRESSING ULTRA PROCESSED FOODS BY DEALING WITH THE ADVERSE NUTRITIONAL COMPOSITION OF THESE FOODS AND HELPING DRIVE TO A MORE HELPFUL FOOD SUPPLY.

>> HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS NOT JUST AN ASPIRATIONAL STATEMENT?

I MEAN, ARE THERE KIND OF LOW-HANGING FRUIT WHERE WE COULD HAVE SOME SORT OF BIPARTISAN CONSENSUS OF PEOPLE SAYING, HEY, LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET BEHIND THIS?

WE SEE, WHEN IT COMES TO STANDING UP NEW AGENCIES, THAT'S GOING TO TAKE ACTIONS OF CONGRESS TO SORT OF FUND SOMETHING COMPLETELY NEW, AND SO, TO MY BRAIN, IT'S, WELL, THAT'S GOING TO TAKE FOREVER, OR, IF AT ALL, RIGHT?

>> YEAH, SO YOU'RE KIND OF GETTING AT, HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S GOALS AND METRICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY?

AND NONE OF THAT IS IN THE STRATEGY.

I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO SEE SOMETHING THAT SAYS, WITHIN TWO YEARS, WE'RE GOING TO DRIVE DOWN THE SODIUM CONTENT OF THESE FOODS, OR, WE'RE GOING TO REDUCE CONSUMPTION IN THIS COUNTRY BY ADDRESSING THINGS LIKE MARKETING OR ACCESS THROUGH THE SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANT PROGRAMS.

THERE ARE STEPS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATED, AND METRICS THAT WE COULD HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE FOR.

AND YOU MENTIONED BIPARTISAN SUPPORT --WE DO HAVE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FROM CONGRESS TO ADDRESS THE FOOD SUPPLY IN WAYS THAT WE DIDN'T HAVE IN PREVIOUS ADMINISTRATIONS.

AND I CAN SPEAK TO MY TIME IN THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION, WHERE WE CERTAINLY DID NOT HAVE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.

DESPITE THAT, WE WERE ABLE TO BAN PARTIALLY HIGH --TRANSFATS.

WE WERE ABLE TO GET THEM ON THE NUTRITION LABEL.

AND WE WERE ABLE TO TARGET TOO MUCH SODIUM IF FOODS, AND THAT WAS WITHOUT BIPARTISAN SUPPORT.

I WAS EXPECTING LOFTY GOALS AND STRATEGIES AND POLICIES COMING OUT OF THIS DOCUMENTS, POTENTIALLY METRICS AND IT JUST WASN'T THERE.

>> DR.

SUSAN MAYNE, FORMER FDA OFFICIAL AT FROM YALE UNIVERSITY, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.