Inside the MAHA Report: Details from Round Two
By Dan Brouman, President, Eurofins Product Development & Innovation
The MAHA Commission released its second report on September 9th, building on the initial findings and outlining strategic steps for implementation. Originally expected in mid-August, the release was delayed by the White House due to scheduling conflicts. In the interim, a leaked draft of the report circulated widely across inboxes, websites, and media outlets. Now that the official version is public, many are comparing it to the leaked draft, which appears to have served as a “trial balloon” which could be a way to gauge industry reactions before finalizing the content. Below, key takeaways are outlined based on the released report, while noting that some elements may have evolved in response to early feedback.
Pesticides
Pesticides, and environmental chemicals, were a focus of the first report and it appears in the second draft that the MAHA Commission has tempered their initial stance which likely caused much consternation to not just pesticide manufacturers but also farmers that rely on their products to produce their products. The newest release starts to outline an approve with the EPA partnering with food and agricultural stakeholders to ensure the public has awareness and confidence in the EPA's review procedures and how it limits the risk to the public. This new stance is a far cry from where the original report suggested the federal government would be headed with pesticides.
Petroleum Based Dyes
The FDA has already begun its revocation process of some petroleum-based dyes, and the second report continues that path. This is likely the least surprising of the developments in the new report, but it is an area that most companies have already begun to act. Many of the large food companies have either changed formulations in the past decade or initiated changes recently to move to natural colors.
Read here on steps to consider when removing artificial colors from your products
GRAS
While there is already action at the federal level in both the House and Senate regarding the GRAS process, the MAHA Commission is also looking to update the way it works. This second report doesn’t go into much detail outside of saying it looks to reform the process, it's likely they are going to head the same way the lawmakers are heading with eliminating the self-affirmed process. Multiple times the MAHA Commission has expressed their concern with conflicts of interest and the self-affirmed GRAS process is one of several said areas.
Ultra Processed Foods
The first report placed heavy emphasis on the dangers of ultra-processed foods, framing them as a major contributor to poor health outcomes. That’s why it’s surprising to see how little attention they receive in this second release. Across the entire 18-page document, “ultra-processed foods” are mentioned only twice—and not in the context of specific recommendations or actions.
Instead, the term appears briefly in reference to future collaboration with other agencies to define it and guide research and policy. This shift in tone raises questions about the evolving priorities of the report and whether external pressures or definitional challenges may have influenced the omission. For those tracking consistency in dietary guidance, the absence is notable.
Deregulation
Not surprisingly, the administration is exploring multiple avenues to reduce bureaucratic barriers, with a particular focus on deregulation within the agricultural and food sectors. The second report outlines several proposals aimed at streamlining processes that have long been viewed as burdensome—especially for small and mid-sized operators. Many of the recommendations center on enabling independent farms and dairies to bring their products to market more directly, without navigating layers of costly or complex regulatory hurdles.
By easing restrictions and simplifying compliance pathways, the administration aims to lower operational costs for these producers, which could in turn lead to more competitive pricing for consumers in local and regional markets. The emphasis on empowering smaller operators reflects a broader push toward decentralization and market access, potentially revitalizing rural economies and encouraging innovation in food production. While the long-term impact remains to be seen, the intent is clear: reduce red tape, promote agility, and support a more inclusive agricultural landscape.
Conclusion
The initial MAHA report sparked considerable criticism, with concerns raised over both its policy implications and the strength of its supporting evidence. That early wave of scrutiny may have prompted a recalibration, softening some of the more contentious elements. With the release of the second report, it’s clear that much of the initial edge has been dulled. This follow-up feels more measured, more strategic—perhaps a reflection of lessons learned from the public’s reaction. While it still aims to advance the Commission’s objectives, the tone and substance suggest a shift toward consensus-building rather than disruption. Whether this signals a long-term pivot, or a tactical pause remains to be seen, but for now, the second report marks a notable evolution in approach.
Start the Conversation
Do you have more questions on how MAHA may impact your products? Reach out to our team of experts today!
Additional Resources
Emerging Trends in Functional Beverage Development
Meet the Author - Dan Brouman - President, Eurofins Product Development & Innovation
Since joining Eurofins in 2017, Dan Brouman has been a driving force behind the company’s growth and transformation. With a sharp strategic mind and a passion for innovation, he’s led key initiatives across multiple divisions—from environmental testing to food safety—delivering measurable impact and long-term value.
Dan’s journey began at Eurofins Environmental, where he spearheaded the acquisition of CEI, doubling revenue and significantly improving EBITA margins. He later took the helm at Eurofins Craft Technologies, launching the SAFER@WORK program during the COVID-19 pandemic to help businesses navigate safety protocols. Most recently, his leadership at Eurofins Food Testing Netherlands helped boost profitability and position the operation for future success.
Armed with a B.S. in Economics from John Carroll University and an MBA from The Wharton School, Dan brings deep expertise in financial analysis, pricing strategy, and operational excellence. Today, he leads Eurofins Product Development & Innovation with a clear vision: to push boundaries, elevate standards, and shape the future of food testing and innovation.
