Processed foods are in the cross hairs of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but battling major companies could collide with President-elect Donald J. Trump’s corporate-friendly goals.Boxes of brightly colored breakfast cereals, vivid orange Doritos and dazzling blue M&Ms may find themselves under attack in the new Trump administration.In excoriating such grocery store staples and their mysterious ingredients, Robert F. Kennedy tapped into a zeitgeist of widening appeal for healthy foods to curb obesity and disease that helped propel President-elect Donald J. Trump to select him to oversee the country’s vast health agency.“We are betraying our children by letting these industries poison them,” Mr. Kennedy said at a campaign rally on Nov. 2, to raucous applause.As Mr. Trump’s choice to head the Department of Health and Human Services, he would have far-reaching authority over the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates about 80 percent of the nation’s food supply. That includes shaping regulations on packaging that declares something “healthy” or discloses the amounts of sugar, salt and other ingredients in most packaged foods.But in vowing to upend the nation’s food system, Mr. Kennedy is taking a direct shot at Big Food, one of the country’s most powerful industries whose traditional allies are Republicans. Even something as simple as removing artificial dyes is likely to result in a knockdown battle for the multibillion-dollar food sector, which is wary of higher manufacturing costs or a dip in sales of products favored by loyal consumers.More broadly, Mr. Kennedy has set an agenda to root out what he considers corruption in the arena of government and public health, arguing that regulatory agencies overseeing food and drugs have been working hand in hand with corporate America to enhance profits rather than to benefit consumers.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

The F.D.A. is investigating the sources of cinnamon and other ingredients produced outside the U.S. as the possible cause of lead poisoning in dozens of children. Advocates are urging mandatory testing of lead in food.With dozens of children across the United States suffering from lead poisoning, federal regulators are now investigating whether the culprit is cinnamon that was added to some popular applesauce pouches, and if lead had been added somewhere along the global supply chain, either to enhance the spice’s reddish color or to add weight.In November, the Food and Drug Administration announced a national recall of three million pouches of cinnamon applesauce made in Ecuador and sold at dollar stores and other outlets under the WanaBana, Schnucks and Weis brand names.Concern about the poisoning cases, affecting as many as 125 children, has highlighted a broader gap in F.D.A. food oversight. There is no federal requirement to test for lead in food made domestically or imported into the United States. In this case, a North Carolina health department investigation pinpointed the source of contamination after receiving reports of high levels of lead readings in children’s blood tests.That the levels of lead in children’s blood tends to be the first line of detection for lead in food is “effectively using kids as canaries,” said Tom Neltner, senior director of safer chemicals at the Environmental Defense Fund, an advocacy group. He said that the F.D.A. has not set enforceable limits for lead in food, much less in spices.“What this shows is a breakdown in the agency, and an industry that has to be fixed,” Mr. Neltner said.Jim Jones, the F.D.A.’s food division director, said in an interview with Politico that the lead contamination appeared to be an “intentional act.”On Friday the F.D.A. said one theory it is exploring is the potential “that the cinnamon contamination occurred as a possible result of economically motivated adulteration.” In simpler terms, that explanation could mean that the company producing the cinnamon used additives to make the spice more appealing and commercially profitable.The agency emphasized that its inquiry was not finished and included other theories.Food safety experts said the addition of lead has long been a concern in spices with a reddish hue.“If you’re selling spices by the pound or ton, you’re going to get a better price for lead-weighted or lead-colored spice,” said Charlotte Brody, national director of Healthy Babies Bright Futures, which advocates the removal of toxins from baby food. “But you’re also going to poison children.”Tests for lead in children’s blood are required in some states and cities but are voluntary in most areas, Mr. Neltner said. When elevated levels are found, lead in paint is often assumed to be the culprit, he said, adding that investigations as careful as the one in North Carolina are exceptional.Like most foods consumed in the United States, the various ingredients in the applesauce pouches came from and were manufactured in different parts of the world before landing on store shelves. The cinnamon applesauce pouches were manufactured in Ecuador by Austrofood, but its supply of cinnamon was provided by another company, Negasmart.This week, the F.D.A. said that it was conducting an on-site inspection of Austrofood’s manufacturing facility in northern Ecuador, and was collecting samples of the cinnamon used in the recalled products. Austrofood did not respond to an email seeking comment.The F.D.A. said that Ecuadorean authorities had told U.S. regulators that Negasmart’s cinnamon had higher levels of lead than those allowed by Ecuador and that the company is currently engaged in a process to determine who was responsible for the contamination. Negasmart did not respond to a query for comment.Ms. Brody said the F.D.A.’s notices and company statements on the recall so far have left a major question unanswered: Which company shipped the cinnamon, which is typically imported from Asia, and where else is it used?“Are we getting contaminated cinnamon from other companies?” she asked. “We need to know.”The F.D.A. said last month that it was screening cinnamon imports from “multiple countries for lead contamination,” and had no indication that the contamination extended beyond the recalled applesauce pouches. It added that as of Nov. 30, the screenings had not turned up any shipments with “higher levels of lead.”The F.D.A. policies on lead in food consumed by children are less rigorous than government standards for the cribs that they sleep in, Ms. Brody said. Children are particularly vulnerable to the effects of lead, which can damage their nervous systems, affecting growth, learning and speech development.In 2017, the F.D.A. set recommendations for the amount of lead in children’s candy after regulators in California discovered popular candies from Mexico that had been tainted either by lead that seeped from the bright wrappers or from the chili powder used in some of the treats.And earlier this year, the agency proposed maximum limits for lead in baby foods like mashed fruits and dry cereals, after years of studies that showed many processed products contained high levels of lead. The draft guidance, which would not be mandatory for food manufacturers to follow, has not yet been finalized.The agency has asked Congress for more power to address the problem, according to its legislative proposals for 2024. The requests include authority to set binding contamination limits in food, noting that under current law, “F.D.A. has limited tools to help reduce exposure to toxic elements in the food supply.”In its congressional request, the agency also pointed out that the food “industry is not required to test ingredients or final products” meant to be consumed by infants or children, and sought authority to require food makers to test for toxic elements.New York State enforces a lead limit in spices, which has spurred a number of product recalls in recent years.California is following New York’s lead, taking a more aggressive stance around testing for heavy metals, especially in baby food. Starting in January, manufacturers of food meant for children under 2 years will need to test a sample of each product once a month for arsenic, cadmium, lead and mercury. Manufacturers will also be required to share the results with California health regulators, if requested.In January 2025, baby-food makers will be required to publicly post the results of their testing.Weis Markets, which pulled the affected cinnamon applesauce pouches from its shelves in late October, said in a statement that it was the manufacturer’s responsibility to test the applesauce pouches for “multiple items” and to “certify the products are wholesome and unadulterated.”Weis said another company, Purcell International in California, which imported the applesauce pouches from Ecuador, was also responsible for testing the safety of the product. Purcell did not respond to an email seeking comment.

The dye was banned in cosmetics after a study suggested it might be a carcinogen. Yet federal regulations still permit its use in foods, stoking concerns that helped build support for the new state law.

The case ends major litigation over claims of marketing e-cigarettes to adolescents, resolving thousands of lawsuits and amounting to billions of dollars in payouts to states, cities and people.New York, California and several other states announced a $462 million settlement with Juul Labs on Wednesday, resolving lawsuits claiming that the company aggressively marketed its e-cigarettes to young people and fueled the nation’s vaping crisis.The agreement brings much of the company’s legal woes to a conclusion, with settlements reached with 47 states and territories and 5,000 individuals and local governments. Juul is in the middle of a trial in Minnesota, an unusual case in which a settlement was not reached. But the company’s efforts to broker deals over the lawsuits have cost it nearly $3 billion so far, a massive sum for a company still seeking official regulatory approval to keep selling its products.The latest settlement resolved the claims of New York, California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts and New Mexico. It follows others that took the company to task for failing to warn young users that the high levels of nicotine in their e-cigarettes would prove addictive.California contended in its lawsuit that for months, Juul did not disclose in its advertising that its devices contained nicotine. It detailed the company’s early marketing efforts, which included handing out free samples of the e-cigarettes in 2015 at trendy events, including one called Nocturnal Wonderland in San Bernardino and a “Movies All Night Slumber Party” in Los Angeles. The New York lawsuit noted that the company embraced the use of social media hashtags like #LightsCameraVapor.Attorneys general in those states conducted investigations that they said had found that Juul executives were aware that their initial marketing lured teenage users into buying its sleek vaping pens, but did little to address the problem as the adolescent vaping rate exploded.Letitia James, New York’s attorney general, said in a statement: “Too many young New Yorkers are struggling to quit vaping and there is no doubt that Juul played a central role in the nationwide vaping epidemic.”A spokesman for Juul, Austin Finan, said that underage use of its products had declined by about 95 percent, citing federal data, since a companywide reset in the fall of 2019. The settlement, Mr. Finan said, represents a near “total resolution of the company’s historical legal challenges and securing certainty for our future.”“The terms of the agreement, like prior settlements, provide financial resources to further combat underage use and develop cessation programs and reflect our current business practices,” Mr. Finan said.Juul has repeatedly denied marketing directly to minors. In other rounds of settlements, the company has not admitted wrongdoing. In those agreements, the payments to plaintiffs are to provide financial resources to combat underage use and develop cessation programs. Juul has framed the deals as part of its effort to “resolve issues from the company’s past.”Selling products with flavors like mango and crème brûlée, Juul sales were soaring in 2019 when federal data showed that 27.5 percent of high school students reported using e-cigarettes, with more than half naming Juul as their brand of choice. As the pressure on Juul mounted, the company began to market itself less as a trend maker and more as a company helping adults make the transition away from traditional cigarettes.Although the vaping crisis among teenagers has appeared to decline from its peak in 2019, public health experts have expressed concerns that about 2.5 million adolescents continue to report using e-cigarettes at rates far higher than adults.Overall, about 4.5 percent of adults use e-cigarettes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. An annual survey typically given in middle and high schools found that in 2022, 2.5 million middle and high school students, or about 9 percent, reported using e-cigarettes in the last 30 days. In that survey, about 14 percent of high school students reported vaping — about half the rate in the survey taken at the peak of the crisis in 2019.While the recent decline has been viewed as a victory, some who oppose e-cigarette use have been troubled by data showing the frequency of use among nearly half the high school students who reported vaping, who said they did so on 20 to 30 days in a month.Last year, Juul resolved thousands of lawsuits by individuals and other plaintiffs.In December, the company agreed to pay $1.7 billion over lawsuits by more than 5,000 individuals, school districts and local governments. In September, the company settled lawsuits filed by more than 30 states for $438.5 million.This month, Juul settled claims filed by West Virginia for $7.9 million.In the Minnesota trial that began a few weeks ago, Keith Ellison, the state attorney general, opened the proceedings by accusing the company of getting teenagers hooked on e-cigarettes “so they could make money.”“They baited, deceived, and addicted a whole new generation of kids after Minnesotans slashed youth smoking rates down to the lowest level in a generation,” Mr. Ellison said.Like other settlements, the latest requires Juul to refrain from marketing to youths. The agreement also requires Juul to stop offering free or “nominally priced” products to consumers, and from using the marketing technique of “product placement” in virtual reality systems.Meanwhile, Juul’s business continues to struggle to find its footing. In 2018, the company dominated the vaping space, with revenues of nearly $1 billion that year. These days, Juul has fallen behind in market share to Vuse, its competitor, which is owned by British American Tobacco. Juul does not disclose its revenues, but B.A.T. said its vapor category in the United States, which includes its popular Vuse Alto product, had about $1 billion in revenues last year, up more than 60 percent from the year earlier.Tobacco giant Altria had pinned its smokeless future on Juul. In 2018, it paid nearly $13 billion for a 35 percent stake in the vaping company only to watch as Juul became the target of blame for teenage nicotine addiction, and the defendant in myriad investigations and thousands of lawsuits. At the end of last year, Altria valued that stake at $250 million and earlier this year, it swapped its stake in exchange for Juul’s intellectual property around heated tobacco.For months last year, speculation swirled around Juul that it would be forced into bankruptcy proceedings. But in late November, the The Wall Street Journal reported two of its directors and earliest investors had provided a cash infusion and that it would lay off about a third of its employees, or 400 people.Meanwhile, Juul is still waiting for the Food and Drug Administration to decide whether it should authorize sales of the company’s products to be allowed a permanent market. The agency is in the process of reviewing many applications of e-cigarettes. (Juul’s products are on store shelves now, because the F.D.A. is not enforcing its requirement for premarket clearance.)The F.D.A. initially denied the company’s request to continue selling its products in June, saying that Juul had submitted “insufficient and conflicting” data. But the agency later decided to conduct additional reviews of the “scientific issues” in the application.