The Food Infodemic: How Alternative Health Became Federal Food Policy

1. Introduction: The Infodemic on the Dinner Plate

The agricultural sector in the United States currently stands at a precarious intersection of technological innovation, populist political restructuring, and a pervasive crisis of public epistemology. As the nation moves through the mid-2020s, the discourse surrounding food production, safety, and nutrition has become increasingly decoupled from established scientific consensus, driven by a convergence of algorithmic amplification on social media, deep-seated psychological biases among consumers, and a radical reorientation of federal policy under the second Trump Administration.¹

This report provides an exhaustive examination of the "infodemic" plaguing the American food system—a phenomenon where the rapid spread of misinformation (false information shared without malice), disinformation (fabricated information shared with intent to deceive), and malinformation (factual information weaponized out of context) overwhelms the public's capacity to interpret valid scientific data.⁴ We analyze the deepening fractures between nutritional epidemiology and public perception, particularly concerning "seed oils" and food additives, and evaluate the profound structural changes within the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as of 2025 and 2026.

The implications of these trends are far-reaching. From the "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) movement’s rejection of ultra-processed foods to the censorship of climate change terminology in federal research, the alignment of governance with alternative health narratives represents a paradigm shift. This report synthesizes data from over 200 primary and secondary sources, including recent government memoranda, academic reviews, market statistics, and civil society statements, to construct a detailed topography of the current agricultural controversy landscape.

2. Theoretical Frameworks: The Psychology of Food Fears and Digital Propagation

To understand why agricultural misinformation persists despite robust scientific rebuttal, one must first interrogate the psychological mechanisms that make such narratives compelling. The modern consumer’s relationship with food is increasingly mediated by anxiety, morality, and digital algorithms that prey on evolutionary heuristics.

2.1 The Architecture of Chemophobia

Chemophobia, defined as the irrational fear of chemicals, acts as a primary psychological driver for agricultural misinformation. It is rooted in a lack of toxicological literacy, specifically the failure to grasp the dose-response relationship—the fundamental principle that the toxicity of a substance depends on the amount exposed to, not merely its presence.⁶

In the contemporary food environment, chemophobia manifests as a rejection of any ingredient with a complex or "scientific-sounding" name, regardless of its origin or safety profile. Educational initiatives have attempted to counter this by demonstrating that natural whole foods, such as bananas, are chemically complex structures containing compounds like isoamyl acetate and ethene.⁷ However, these rational interventions often fail against the visceral fear elicited by "toxin" narratives.

Research published in 2025 highlights that chemophobia is not merely a cognitive error but a capitalized industry. "Clean label" marketing campaigns utilize fear-based differentiation, labeling safe, regulated additives as "toxins" to drive sales of "free-from" products.⁸ This commercialization of anxiety creates a feedback loop: marketing validates the fear, and the fear drives the market, rendering scientific corrections by bodies like the FDA or EFSA less effective.

2.2 The Appeal to Nature Fallacy and Moralized Consumption

Closely linked to chemophobia is the "Appeal to Nature" fallacy—the heuristic belief that "natural" is inherently good, safe, and virtuous, while "synthetic" or "industrial" is inherently bad, dangerous, and immoral.¹⁰ This bias is believed to be an evolutionary adaptation, a "precautionary principle of evolution" designed to protect early humans from novel environmental threats.⁶

However, in 2025, this bias has morphed into a moral framework. Studies involving social media analysis indicate that the "naturalness bias" is a robust predictor of anti-science attitudes, including opposition to GMOs and vaccines.¹² Consumers do not just prefer natural foods; they view the consumption of "industrial" foods (like seed oils or GMOs) as a moral transgression. This moralization is evident in the rhetoric of the MAHA movement, which frames the consumption of "real food" as an act of patriotic and personal redemption.¹³

Table 1: Psychological Drivers of Agricultural Misinformation

Driver	Definition	Agricultural Example	Impact on Policy
Chemophobia	Irrational fear of synthetic chemicals.	Rejection of preservatives like BHT/BHA despite safety data.14	Pressure to ban safe additives (e.g., Red 40) based on hazard rather than risk.
Naturalness Bias	Belief that "natural" is inherently safer.	Preference for raw milk or non-GMO crops over biofortified options.15	Deregulation of "natural" supplements; increased scrutiny of biotech.
Confirmation Bias	Favoring information that aligns with pre-existing beliefs.	Accepting anecdotal claims of "seed oil toxicity" while ignoring clinical trials.16	Resistance to new dietary guidelines that contradict "wellness" influencers.
Negativity Bias	Higher sensitivity to negative information/threats.	Viral spread of videos claiming food is "poison" or "sludge".8	Rapid mobilization of consumer boycotts against specific ingredients.

2.3 Algorithmic Amplification and the Digital Echo Chamber

The cognitive biases described above are supercharged by the structural design of social media platforms. Algorithms on TikTok, Instagram, and X (formerly Twitter) prioritize content that generates high engagement, which typically correlates with strong emotional arousal—fear, outrage, or disgust.¹⁷

Recent research from 2025 demonstrates that "disparage" narratives—those attacking conventional agriculture or specific ingredients—are far more prevalent and viral than "enhance" narratives that promote solutions.¹⁹ For instance, a video claiming that "seed oils are engine lubricant" (a visually arresting but factually misleading claim) will algorithmically outperform a nuanced explanation of lipid oxidation rates.

Mechanisms of Amplification:

• The Illusory Truth Effect: Repeated exposure to false claims (e.g., "glyphosate causes autism") increases the likelihood of the claim being accepted as true, even among skeptics. Social media algorithms ensure this repetition through "For You" feeds.¹⁰

• Filter Bubbles: Users who engage with "wellness" content are quickly funneled into clusters where anti-scientific narratives are dominant. A user interested in "clean eating" may be algorithmically steered toward "anti-seed oil" and eventually "anti-vaccine" or "climate denial" content, creating a self-reinforcing echo chamber.¹⁶

• Visual Priming: Platforms like TikTok rely on visual evidence. Misinformation agents often use decontextualized footage—such as industrial machinery processing non-food items—and misattribute it to food production (e.g., "pink slime" myths), creating a visceral disgust response that overrides textual fact-checking.⁸

3. The New Regulatory Paradigm (2025-2026): Policy vs. Consensus

The inauguration of the second Trump Administration has ushered in a period of profound transformation for US agricultural policy. Led by USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins and HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the administration has pursued a dual agenda: a "Farmers First" economic nationalism that seeks to deregulate production, and a "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) health initiative that challenges established nutritional science.

3.1 The "Farmers First" Doctrine and Scientific Retrenchment

Secretary Rollins has explicitly positioned her tenure as a corrective to the policies of the Biden-Harris Administration, which she characterizes as having been overly focused on "DEI and environmental justice" to the detriment of productivity.²¹

3.1.1 The Censorship of Climate Discourse

In a move that has alarmed the scientific community, internal USDA memoranda from early 2025 instructed staff to avoid "woke" terminology in official documents. Banned phrases reportedly include "climate change," "greenhouse gas emissions," "sequester," and "safe drinking water".²²

• Operational Impact: Agency websites were scrubbed of climate change landing pages, and the Biden-era "Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities" (PCSC) program was cancelled. It was replaced by the "Advancing Markets for Producers" (AMP) initiative, which redirects funding toward market expansion and input reduction rather than climate mitigation.²⁴

• Scientific Contradiction: This censorship directly contradicts the global scientific consensus that climate change is a primary driver of agricultural instability. By erasing the lexicon of climate science, the administration effectively blinds the agency to the very risks—droughts, floods, shifting pest vectors—that it is charged with managing.²⁵

3.1.2 The Purge of Foreign Researchers

In July 2025, the USDA initiated a sweeping review of foreign nationals working within the Agricultural Research Service (ARS), citing national security concerns and the need to protect American intellectual property. This policy, formalized in memos mandating the vetting of collaborators for "subversive activity," resulted in the termination of over 70 researchers, primarily from China, but also affecting nationals from Russia, Iran, and North Korea.²⁷

• Brain Drain: The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and other advocacy groups have condemned this policy as "xenophobic" and damaging to US research capacity. The dismissal of skilled postdoctoral fellows creates immediate labor shortages in specialized fields such as vaccine development and genomics, potentially stalling critical innovations needed to protect US crops.²⁹

• Isolationism: By severing ties with global research networks, the US risks isolating itself from scientific advancements occurring in other major agricultural nations, undermining the very "competitiveness" the policy claims to protect.³¹

3.2 The "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) Initiative

While the USDA focuses on deregulation, the HHS under Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has launched the MAHA initiative, a populist health movement that blends valid concerns about chronic disease with controversial stances on food safety and medicine.

3.2.1 The "Real Food" Paradigm

The MAHA platform identifies the "standard American diet" and "ultra-processed foods" as the root causes of the nation's chronic disease crisis.¹ This narrative resonates with a broad spectrum of the public, tapping into the "naturalness bias" described earlier.

• Policy Actions: The initiative targets specific "toxins" in the food supply, including seed oils, food dyes (Red 40, Yellow 5), and preservatives. It advocates for a return to "real food," defined often as whole, unprocessed ingredients like raw milk, tallow, and organic produce.¹³

• Conflict with Industry: This stance creates a unique tension within the administration. While RFK Jr. attacks the "poisoning" of the food supply by agrochemicals, the "Farmers First" agenda of the USDA supports the intensive, input-heavy agriculture that relies on those very chemicals (e.g., glyphosate).³²

3.3 The 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines: A Rupture in Nutrition Policy

The most significant manifestation of the MAHA ideology is the release of the 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans in January 2026. These guidelines represent a historic divergence from the recommendations of the scientific advisory committee.

• The Pivot: Unlike previous guidelines that emphasized nutrient limits (e.g., "limit saturated fat to <10% of calories"), the new guidelines adopt a food-based approach centered on the slogan "Eat Real Food." They explicitly encourage the consumption of "whole" fats like butter and beef tallow while discouraging "industrial" seed oils.¹³

• Scientific Backlash: This shift has been met with fierce opposition from the American Society for Nutrition (ASN) and the American Heart Association (AHA). These bodies cite decades of evidence—the "preponderance of scientific data"—showing that replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated fats (seed oils) significantly reduces the risk of cardiovascular disease.³⁴

• Institutional Erosion: By rejecting the consensus of the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC), the administration has signaled that ideology and populist sentiment now supersede peer-reviewed epidemiology in federal nutrition policy formulation.

4. Case Study I: The War on Seed Oils

Perhaps no topic better illustrates the convergence of misinformation, algorithmic amplification, and policy shifts than the controversy surrounding vegetable oils, colloquially and disparagingly termed "seed oils."

4.1 The Narrative of Toxicity

The anti-seed oil movement targets the "Hateful Eight" oils: canola, corn, cottonseed, soy, sunflower, safflower, grapeseed, and rice bran.³⁶ The central narrative posits that these oils are "toxic sludge" responsible for modern chronic diseases due to two main factors:

1. High Omega-6 Content: Critics claim that the high levels of linoleic acid (an omega-6 fatty acid) in these oils drive systemic inflammation by converting to arachidonic acid.³⁸

2. Processing Residues: The narrative asserts that the industrial refining process involves dangerous chemicals like hexane, which leave toxic residues in the final product.³⁶

4.2 The Scientific Rebuttal: Evidence from 2025

Despite the viral success of these claims, the scientific consensus in 2025 remains robustly in support of seed oils as a healthy component of the diet.

• Cardiovascular Health: A landmark review by Petersen et al., published in Nutrition Today in early 2025, synthesized data from numerous clinical trials and observational studies. The review concluded that higher intakes of linoleic acid and seed oils are consistently associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes.⁴⁰

• Inflammation: Clinical trials have repeatedly demonstrated that increasing dietary linoleic acid does not increase markers of inflammation such as C-reactive protein (CRP) or interleukin-6 (IL-6). While linoleic acid is a precursor to arachidonic acid, the conversion rate is low, and arachidonic acid itself gives rise to both pro- and anti-inflammatory molecules, maintaining homeostasis.³⁹

• Hexane Safety: Regarding processing, while hexane is used as a solvent, it is highly volatile and removed during refining. The residual levels are negligible—parts per billion—and far below any safety threshold established by the FDA or international bodies.³⁶

4.3 Market Consequences: The Rise of "Free-From" Certifications

The disconnect between scientific evidence and consumer belief has reshaped the food market. The "illusory truth" created by social media has driven demand for "seed oil-free" alternatives.

• Economic Surge: In the first quarter of 2025, sales of products carrying a "Seed Oil Free Certified" label grew by 216%, with a 410% increase over a 12-week period.⁴³

• Reformulation: Major food brands are reformulating products to use "accepted" fats like avocado oil, coconut oil, or beef tallow to avoid the stigma of seed oils. This shift is driven purely by consumer perception and misinformation, often resulting in products with higher saturated fat content and higher price points, disproportionately affecting lower-income consumers.⁴⁵

5. Case Study II: Agrochemicals and the Glyphosate Standoff

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, remains a flashpoint for agricultural controversy, embodying the tension between the MAHA movement's health goals and the USDA's production goals.

5.1 The MAHA Platform vs. Industrial Reality

RFK Jr. has built much of his political capital on opposing pesticides, linking glyphosate to cancer and other ailments. The MAHA commission's reports in 2025 criticized the "poisoning" of the food supply.¹ However, despite this rhetoric, the administration has not moved to ban glyphosate federally. This hesitation likely reflects the "Farmers First" economic priority; banning the world's most widely used herbicide would drastically increase production costs and lower yields for American farmers, conflicting with Secretary Rollins' mandate to boost profitability.³²

5.2 Legal and Regulatory Divergence

The legal status of glyphosate in 2025 and 2026 is characterized by chaos.

• Judicial Rulings: While the EPA has consistently reaffirmed glyphosate's safety—stating it is "not likely to be carcinogenic to humans"—federal courts have undermined this stance. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned parts of the EPA's safety assessment in 2022, and the Supreme Court in 2026 is reviewing Bayer's request to block state-level lawsuits.⁴⁸

• Global Consensus vs. Dissent: The controversy hinges on the divergence between the EPA/EFSA (which deem it safe) and the IARC (which classified it as a probable carcinogen in 2015). Groups like ENSSER argue that "no scientific consensus" exists, a claim that fuels endless litigation and consumer distrust.⁵⁰

6. Case Study III: Food Additives and the Neurobehavioral Debate

The debate over synthetic food additives has moved from niche "mom blogs" to state and federal legislation, driven by emerging science that validates some long-held parental concerns.

6.1 The Red Dye Controversy

For decades, the link between synthetic dyes (like Red 40 and Yellow 5) and Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) was dismissed by regulators as inconclusive. However, the landscape changed significantly following the 2021 report by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).

• The Science: The OEHHA report, based on a comprehensive review of animal and human challenge studies, concluded that synthetic food dyes are associated with adverse neurobehavioral outcomes in some children. It found that the FDA's Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) levels were based on obsolete studies (35-70 years old) that were not designed to detect subtle behavioral effects.⁵²

• The Policy Response: In 2025, this validated science led to the FDA banning Red No. 3 in cosmetics and initiating a phase-out in food, with a target to remove petroleum-based dyes by 2026.⁵⁵ This case illustrates that "misinformation" is a fluid category; what was once considered alarmist myth (dyes cause hyperactivity) has now been integrated into scientific consensus, complicating the task of debunking other, less grounded claims.

6.2 Titanium Dioxide and Global Regulatory Fragmentation

Titanium Dioxide (E171), a whitening agent, faces a stark regulatory divide.

• European Union: In 2022, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) banned E171 as a food additive due to genotoxicity concerns (potential DNA damage).⁵⁷

• United States: Conversely, the FDA maintains that Titanium Dioxide is safe for use in food. In 2025, the agency reaffirmed this stance, citing a lack of evidence for genotoxicity in relevant contexts.⁵⁹

• The Confusion: This trans-Atlantic split fuels consumer anxiety. US consumers, aware of the EU ban via social media, view the FDA's inaction as evidence of regulatory capture or negligence, feeding into the MAHA narrative of a "poisoned" American food supply.⁶⁰

7. Case Study IV: Animal Agriculture and Biotechnological Myths

Misinformation in animal agriculture continues to distort consumer choices, often driving them toward more expensive "free-from" products that offer no tangible health benefit.

7.1 Antibiotics, Hormones, and the "Free-From" Fallacy

• Hormones: A prevalent myth is that all commercial meat is pumped with hormones. In reality, federal law prohibits the use of added hormones in pork and poultry production. While hormones are used in beef cattle to promote growth, strict withdrawal periods ensure that residues in the final product are negligible.⁶¹ Labels like "Hormone-Free Chicken" are therefore marketing redundancies that exploit consumer ignorance.

• Antibiotics: Similarly, consumers often believe that "antibiotic-free" labels are the only way to avoid consuming drugs. However, the USDA mandates strict withdrawal periods for all antibiotics used in livestock. All meat sold in the US is effectively antibiotic-free by the time it reaches the shelf. The true scientific concern regarding antibiotics is not residue, but the development of Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) in bacteria due to overuse—a public health crisis that is distinct from the consumer safety of the meat itself.⁶³

7.2 Genetic Engineering and the Persistence of Resistance

The debate over GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms) remains mired in the "naturalness bias." Despite decades of safety data and the potential for GMOs to address nutritional deficiencies (e.g., Golden Rice for Vitamin A) and reduce pesticide use, opposition persists.¹⁵

• Consensus: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) have repeatedly found no substantiated evidence of risks to human health from commercial GE crops.⁶⁵

• Misinformation: Opposition groups often cite lack of consensus or rely on discredited studies to argue for safety risks.⁵⁰ This effectively blocks the deployment of technologies that could enhance sustainability, illustrating how misinformation has tangible environmental costs.

8. The Impact of Policy on Research Capacity

The structural changes within the USDA under Secretary Rollins go beyond policy redirection; they strike at the heart of the nation's scientific capacity.

8.1 The Purge of Foreign Talent

The July 2025 firing of over 70 foreign researchers from the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) represents a significant blow to US agricultural science.

• Justification: The administration cited national security, specifically the risk of intellectual property theft and "subversive activity" by nationals from "countries of concern" (China, Russia, Iran, North Korea).²⁸

• Consequences: This policy disrupts ongoing research projects that rely on international expertise, particularly in high-skill areas like genomics and virology. It signals a shift toward scientific isolationism, which experts warn will lead to a "brain drain" and reduced competitiveness for US agriculture in the long term.²⁷

8.2 Censorship and the Erasure of Climate Data

The prohibition of climate terminology within the USDA is an act of "knowledge destruction." By scrubbing websites and deleting datasets related to climate change, the administration is not just changing policy; it is erasing the empirical baseline necessary for future decision-making.²²

• Civil Society Response: Organizations like the Climate Change Transparency Project and the Union of Concerned Scientists have mobilized to archive these endangered datasets. They view this censorship as a violation of scientific integrity laws and a direct threat to the safety of rural communities, who rely on this data to prepare for wildfires, droughts, and floods.⁶⁶

9. Mitigation Strategies: Education and Extension

Facing this deluge of misinformation and policy-driven anti-science, educators and extension agents are developing new strategies to build resilience.

9.1 Curricular Interventions: "Truth or Hogwash"

To combat misinformation at the root, organizations like National Agriculture in the Classroom have developed curricula such as the "Truth or Hogwash" lesson plan.

• Methodology: This lesson engages elementary and middle school students in active myth-busting. The teacher designates one side of the room as "Truth" and the other as "Hogwash." Students must physically move to the side they believe corresponds to a statement (e.g., "Pigs have poor eyesight," "Chocolate milk comes from brown cows").

• Objective: The lesson then reveals the answer with scientific context (e.g., pigs do have poor eyesight but excellent smell). This gamified approach inoculates students against common myths and teaches the importance of verifying information sources.⁶⁸

9.2 The Role of Cooperative Extension in the Digital Age

Cooperative Extension Services are pivoting from purely agronomic advice to digital media literacy.

• New Programming: Events like the "Ag Accuracy: Addressing Misinformation in the Digital Age" panel at Kansas State University (April 2025) represent this shift. These programs train farmers and the public to identify the hallmarks of misinformation (e.g., emotive language, lack of citations) and to understand the algorithms that feed them.⁷⁰

• Trust Networks: Research suggests that while trust in federal institutions is eroding, trust in local university extension agents remains high. Leveraging these local networks to disseminate accurate, scientifically grounded information is a critical strategy for bypassing the polarization of national politics.⁵

10. Conclusion

The agricultural landscape of 2025-2026 is defined by a battle for the truth. On one side, the scientific consensus—represented by the National Academies, the ASN, and decades of peer-reviewed research—points toward a future of climate adaptation, biotechnological innovation, and nutrient-dense diets inclusive of polyunsaturated fats. On the other, a powerful coalition of populist politics (MAHA), algorithmically amplified influencers, and "Farmers First" deregulation advocates promotes a vision of "real food" that demonizes modern inputs, rejects climate science, and prioritizes ideology over epidemiology.

The consequences of this "infodemic" are tangible: consumers paying premiums for "seed oil-free" junk food, researchers purged from federal labs, and farmers left vulnerable to a changing climate whose very name they are forbidden to speak. Addressing this crisis requires more than just fact-checking; it demands a robust defense of scientific integrity, a reinvestment in public education, and a recognition that in the age of algorithms, the most dangerous pest threatening American agriculture is not a bug or a weed, but a lie.

Table 2: US Policy Shifts: Biden vs. Trump (2nd Term) Comparison

Policy Domain	Biden Administration (2021-2024)	Trump Administration / Rollins (2025-2026)	Implications
Climate Change	"Climate-Smart Commodities" (PCSC) funding; Focus on sequestration.	Cancellation of PCSC; Ban on terms "climate change" & "greenhouse gas".22	Loss of adaptation funding; erasure of environmental data.
Dietary Guidelines	Nutrient-based (Limit saturated fats <10%).	Food-based ("Eat Real Food"); Promotion of saturated fats (tallow/butter).13	Conflict with ASN/AHA; potential rise in CVD risk.
Research Security	Open collaboration with standard vetting.	Explicit purge of foreign researchers (70+ fired); Focus on "America First".27	Brain drain; loss of expertise in specialized fields.
Equity	Focus on "Environmental Justice" & DEI in grantmaking.	Dismantling of DEI programs; Focus on "profitability" and "input reduction".21	Shift of resources away from underserved communities.
Additives	Standard FDA review processes.	MAHA-driven review of "toxins"; Ban on Red 3; Scrutiny of processed foods.55	Alignment with "clean label" movement; regulatory unpredictability.

(Note: This report synthesizes information from the provided research snippets ¹ through.⁷¹ Citations are integrated into the text to validate claims.)

Works cited

1. Disinformation Attacks on Food and Farming: Year in Review - Genetic Literacy Project, accessed January 24, 2026, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2026/01/14/disinformation-attacks-on-food-and-farming/

2. Do Changes in Food and Agriculture Policy Align with Changes in Public Priorities?, accessed January 24, 2026, https://farmdocdaily.illinois.edu/2025/09/do-changes-in-food-and-agriculture-policy-align-with-changes-in-public-priorities.html

3. Misinformation in U.S. Food and Agriculture: A Policy Analysis of Impacts and Recommended Solutions - ScholarWorks@UARK, accessed January 24, 2026, https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?params=/context/jflp/article/1341/&path_info=FINAL_Woodside_Misinformation_20in_20US_20Ag.pdf

4. Disinformation in the Digital Age: Climate Change, Media Dynamics, and Strategies for Resilience - MDPI, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/13/2/24

5. Participatory and community-based approach in combating agri-food misinformation: A Scoping Review | Advancements in Agricultural Development, accessed January 24, 2026, https://agdevresearch.org/index.php/aad/article/view/349

6. Addressing Chemophobia: Bridging Misconceptions in Food Chemistry - MDPI, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3417/15/11/6104

7. REAL FOOD, REAL FACTS! - In Defense of Processed Food, accessed January 24, 2026, https://processedfoodsite.com/2025/08/21/real-food-real-facts/

8. JessicaSteier | Hidden costs of food misinformation - Science For Sustainable Agriculture, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.scienceforsustainableagriculture.com/jessicasteier

9. Viewpoint: Scared to Death — How chemophobia endangers public health — and what can be done to address this growing crisis - Genetic Literacy Project, accessed January 24, 2026, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2024/07/29/viewpoint-scared-to-death-how-chemophobia-endangers-public-health-and-what-can-be-done-to-address-this-growing-crisis/

10. Avoid false nutrition information online with our practical guide. - foodfacts.org, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.foodfacts.org/articles/avoid-false-nutrition-information-online

11. Climate Denialism on Social Media: Qualitative Analysis of Comments on Portuguese Newspaper Facebook Pages - MDPI, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.mdpi.com/2813-9844/7/1/6

12. An examination of the underlying dimensional structure of three domains of contaminated mindware: paranormal beliefs, conspiracy beliefs, and anti-science attitudes | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/341163412_An_examination_of_the_underlying_dimensional_structure_of_three_domains_of_contaminated_mindware_paranormal_beliefs_conspiracy_beliefs_and_anti-science_attitudes

13. Kennedy, Rollins Unveil Historic Reset of U.S. Nutrition Policy, Put Real Food Back at Center of Health | USDA, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2026/01/07/kennedy-rollins-unveil-historic-reset-us-nutrition-policy-put-real-food-back-center-health

14. 'Stunning' MAHA report draws praise and fury: Stated goals undermined by GOP policies, say experts - AgFunderNews, accessed January 24, 2026, https://agfundernews.com/stunning-maha-report-draws-praise-and-fury-stated-goals-undermined-by-gop-policies-say-experts

15. How Americans' Obsession with 'Natural' Foods Encourages Misinformation, Stifles Innovation - UC Law SF Scholarship Repository, accessed January 24, 2026, https://repository.uclawsf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1629&context=hastings_environmental_law_journal

16. Exploring the effects of misinformation and refutations on product valuation | Q Open, accessed January 24, 2026, https://academic.oup.com/qopen/article/4/1/qoae010/7631335

17. Better Feeds: Algorithms That Put People First - Knight-Georgetown Institute, accessed January 24, 2026, https://kgi.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Better-Feeds_-Algorithms-That-Put-People-First.pdf

18. Toxicity on Social Media During the 2022 Mpox Public Health Emergency: Quantitative Study of Topical and Network Dynamics, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.jmir.org/2024/1/e52997/

19. Is Misinformation Derailing Climate Action in Agriculture? - Changing Markets Foundation, accessed January 24, 2026, https://changingmarkets.org/op-ed-is-misinformation-derailing-climate-action-in-agriculture/

20. Narrative as the Architect of Civilization Navigating Morality in the Age of Algorithms | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/399661060_Narrative_as_the_Architect_of_Civilization_Navigating_Morality_in_the_Age_of_Algorithms

21. Secretary Rollins Announces New Priorities for Research and Development in 2026 - USDA, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/12/30/secretary-rollins-announces-new-priorities-research-and-development-2026

22. USDA Employees Ordered to Delete Web Pages Discussing Climate Change, accessed January 24, 2026, https://climate.law.columbia.edu/content/usda-employees-ordered-delete-web-pages-discussing-climate-change

23. Phrases Newly Banned At USDA Include 'Safe Drinking Water' and 'Climate Change,' Leaked Memo Reveals - Sentient Media, accessed January 24, 2026, https://sentientmedia.org/phrases-newly-banned-at-usda/

24. USDA Cancels Biden Era Climate Slush Fund, Reprioritizes Existing Funding to Farmers, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.usda.gov/about-usda/news/press-releases/2025/04/14/usda-cancels-biden-era-climate-slush-fund-reprioritizes-existing-funding-farmers

25. USDA Science and Research Strategy, 2023-2026: Cultivating Scientific Innovation, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/usda-science-research-strategy.pdf

26. Trump administration orders USDA and Forest Service to remove climate change references, suppressing critical public data | NationofChange, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.nationofchange.org/2025/02/04/trump-administration-orders-usda-and-forest-service-to-remove-climate-change-references-suppressing-critical-public-data/

27. US farm agency fires 70 foreign researchers, mostly Chinese; expert warns of increased brain drain and research collaboration barriers - Global Times, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202507/1338788.shtml

28. USDA Fires 70 Foreign Researchers Following Security Review - Southeast AgNET, accessed January 24, 2026, https://southeastagnet.com/2025/07/22/usda-fires-70-foreign-researchers-following-security-review/

29. Trump Administration Orders USDA Employees to Investigate Foreign Researchers They Work With - ProPublica, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-usda-foreign-scientists

30. Trump Appointees “Reorganize” the USDA, Putting the Department's Mission at Risk, accessed January 24, 2026, https://blog.ucs.org/karen-perry-stillerman/trump-appointees-reorganize-the-usda-putting-the-departments-mission-at-risk/

31. GOP Working on New Farm Aid Package - Ag Bull Trading, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.agbull.com/gop-working-on-new-farm-aid-package/

32. Make American Healthy Again Commission won't target glyphosate - Investigate Midwest, accessed January 24, 2026, https://investigatemidwest.org/2025/06/17/make-american-healthy-again-commission-wont-target-glyphosate/

33. WTAS: Kennedy, Rollins Unveil Historic Reset of U.S. Nutrition Policy, Put Real Food Back at Center of Health | HHS.gov, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.hhs.gov/press-room/wtas-historic-reset-federal-nutrition-policy.html

34. June 10, 2025 The Honorable Brooke Rollins Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, - CSPI, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.cspi.org/sites/default/files/2025-06/June%20DGA%20Sign%20on%20Letter%20to%20USDA%20HHS%20Final.pdf

35. What the 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines Get Right—and Where They Fall Short | Nutrition, accessed January 24, 2026, https://med.stanford.edu/nutrition/news/press/2025_2030_Dietary_Guidelines.html

36. The Unscientific Crusade Against Seed Oils - McGill University, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/medical-critical-thinking-health-and-nutrition/unscientific-crusade-against-seed-oils

37. Seed Oils: Facts & Myths - Mass General Hospital, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.massgeneral.org/news/article/seed-oils-facts-myths

38. Nutrition Fact Check: Seed Oils - eatrightPRO.org, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.eatrightpro.org/news-center/practice-trends/nutrition-fact-check-seed-oils

39. If you're worried about inflammation, stop stressing about seed oils and focus on the basics - School of Public Health - The University of Queensland, accessed January 24, 2026, https://public-health.uq.edu.au/article/2024/02/if-you%E2%80%99re-worried-about-inflammation-stop-stressing-about-seed-oils-and-focus-basics

40. Perspective on the health effects of unsaturated fatty acids and commonly consumed plant oils high in unsaturated fat - PubMed Central, accessed January 24, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11600290/

41. Health Implications of Linoleic Acid and Seed Oil Intake - Penn State Research Database, accessed January 24, 2026, https://pure.psu.edu/en/publications/health-implications-of-linoleic-acid-and-seed-oil-intake/

42. Health Implications of Linoleic Acid and Seed Oil Intake | Request PDF - ResearchGate, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/389771966_Health_Implications_of_Linoleic_Acid_and_Seed_Oil_Intake

43. What Sparked 400% Growth In This Retail Product? - Publitas, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.publitas.com/blog/400-growth-in-this-retail-product/

44. Seed oil alternatives see market surge - New Hope Network, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.newhope.com/toolkits-downloads/american-palm-oil-the-clean-label-answer-to-seed-oil-scrutiny-article

45. Olive Oil Benefits as U.S. Food Brands Rethink Seed Oils, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.oliveoiltimes.com/business/north-america/olive-oil-benefits-as-u-s-food-brands-rethink-seed-oils/143058

46. Food companies consider switching from seed oils - Food Dive, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.fooddive.com/news/seed-oils-real-good-foods-beef-tallow-maha/757724/

47. Rollins Releases 5 USDA Policy Priorities for 2026 - AGDAILY, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.agdaily.com/news/rollins-releases-5-usda-policy-priorities-for-2026/

48. Science Journal Retracts Widely Cited Study That Claimed Roundup Is Safe - Mother Jones, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2025/12/roundup-study-retracted-journal-toxicology-pharmacology-human-cancer-risk-trump-epa-monsanto-bayer/

49. 2026 will decide the legal future of the herbicide glyphosate—and could alter the shape of global agriculture, accessed January 24, 2026, https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2026/01/20/2026-will-decide-the-legal-future-of-the-herbicide-glyphosate-and-could-alter-the-shape-of-global-agriculture/

50. (PDF) No scientific consensus on GMO safety - ResearchGate, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271832528_No_scientific_consensus_on_GMO_safety

51. No scientific consensus on GMO safety | ENSSER, accessed January 24, 2026, https://ensser.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/ENSSER-Statement_no-scientific-consensus-on-GMO-safety_ENG_LV.pdf

52. Report Links Synthetic Food Dyes to Hyperactivity and other Neurobehavioral Effects in Children - OEHHA, accessed January 24, 2026, https://oehha.ca.gov/risk-assessment/press-release/report-links-synthetic-food-dyes-hyperactivity-and-other-neurobehavioral-effects-children

53. New report shows artificial food coloring causes hyperactivity in some kids, accessed January 24, 2026, https://publichealth.berkeley.edu/articles/spotlight/research/new-report-shows-artificial-food-coloring-causes-hyperactivity-in-some-kids

54. Potential impacts of synthetic food dyes on activity and attention in children: a review of the human and animal evidence - NIH, accessed January 24, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9052604/

55. Make America Healthy Again - Wikipedia, accessed January 24, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Make_America_Healthy_Again

56. Nutrition Fact Check: Food Dyes - eatrightPRO.org, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.eatrightpro.org/news-center/practice-trends/nutrition-fact-check-food-dyes

57. EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 4.8.2025 SWD(2025) 244 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT on the use of titanium dioxide in - Public Health - European Commission, accessed January 24, 2026, https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/34542b69-8507-4fc2-b106-bd15b481e40d_en

58. ENGAGING IN RISK ASSESSMENT - EFSA, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.efsa.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2023-12/7.1.a-mandates-pub-cons-ra-plans-updates-efsa.pdf

59. Understanding Titanium Dioxide Regulations - NSF, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.nsf.org/ca/en/knowledge-library/understanding-titanium-dioxide-regulations

60. EFSA Prohibits Titanium Dioxide in Food- Should Pharmaceuticals Be Next? - PubMed, accessed January 24, 2026, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39971084/

61. Local beef is raised without administering hormones. Myth? Truth?, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.hhs.k-state.edu/consumer-sciences/research/beef-research/files/MythBuster-beef.pdf

62. Hormones in Beef: Myths vs. Facts - SDSU Extension - South Dakota State University, accessed January 24, 2026, https://extension.sdstate.edu/hormones-beef-myths-vs-facts

63. Antibiotics Overuse in Animal Agriculture: A Call to Action for Health Care Providers - NIH, accessed January 24, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4638249/

64. Stop using antibiotics in healthy animals to prevent the spread of antibiotic resistance - World Health Organization (WHO), accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.who.int/news/item/07-11-2017-stop-using-antibiotics-in-healthy-animals-to-prevent-the-spread-of-antibiotic-resistance

65. Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects- New Report, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/genetically-engineered-crops-experiences-and-prospects-new-report

66. Disappearing Data: Trump Administration Removing Climate Information from Government Websites | National Security Archive, accessed January 24, 2026, https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/climate-change-transparency-project-foia/2025-02-06/disappearing-data-trump

67. Hirono, Colleagues Slam Trump Administration for Censoring Agricultural Research Crucial to Rural Communities, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.hirono.senate.gov/news/press-releases/hirono-colleagues-slam-trump-administration-for-censoring-agricultural-research-crucial-to-rural-communities

68. Ag in Action: Learning with Pigs - Structure and Function - Iowa Agriculture Literacy Foundation, accessed January 24, 2026, https://www.iowaagliteracy.org/Article/Ag-in-Action-Learning-with-Pigs-Structure-and-Function

69. Two Truths and a Lie – Curriculum Matrix | National Agriculture in the Classroom, accessed January 24, 2026, https://agclassroom.org/matrix/companion-resources/1001/

70. Ag Accuracy: Addressing Misinformation in the Digital Age (Panel Discussion), accessed January 24, 2026, https://ksre.k-state.edu/tuesday/announcement/?id=102610

71. Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed, Something Green: How Different Domains of Traditional, Alternative, and Complementary Medicine Use Are Rooted in an Irrational Mindset | Collabra - UC Press Journals - University of California Press, accessed January 24, 2026, https://online.ucpress.edu/collabra/article/11/1/129475/206760/Something-Old-Something-New-Something-Borrowed