What’s Happening at the FDA’s Food Division and Why It Matters

If Food Safety is a Priority, Why Gut the FDA’s Food Division?

There’s a lot going on within the FDA’s food division, and even more speculation about what it means for food safety and the future of our food supply. Let’s break it down.

Jim Jones Resigns After Mass Layoffs

On February 17, Jim Jones, the Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods, resigned from his position. His departure was in direct response to the “indiscriminate” layoffs of 89 staff members within the Human Foods Program, which he warned would undermine the agency’s ability to protect the food supply and public health.

The Human Foods Program is one of nearly a dozen centers and offices within the FDA. It was established on October 1, 2024, as part of a major reorganization to consolidate all food safety, nutrition, and chemical safety functions under one division. The stated goals? Improve efficiency, enhance consumer protection, and better address foodborne illness, diet-related chronic disease, and emerging food safety challenges. This program oversees 80% of the U.S. food supply, regulating food safety, additives, labeling, and public health initiatives related to diet and disease prevention.

For all the MAHA rhetoric about the dangers of our food system, it’s important to take a step back and look at the actual data. The Global Food Security Index, compiled by a well-respected UK-based organization, which evaluates food quality, safety, affordability, and availability across 113 countries, currently ranks the United States 3rd in the world in terms of food safety and quality. Meaning that the US food system is among the safest and highest quality in the world. This is not by accident. It’s largely due to the FDA’s regulatory structure, the scientific review process, and the oversight carried out by programs like the Human Foods Program. Weakening this system by eliminating trained experts and dismantling regulatory safeguards could put this high ranking, and more importantly, public health, at risk.

When Jones was appointed in 2023, he was tasked with leading this transition, focusing on three key areas:

• Preventing pathogen-related foodborne illness

• Expanding oversight of chemical safety in foods and new food technology

• Elevating nutrition policies to reduce diet-related chronic disease

Given MAHA’s stated goals, doesn’t it seem like this administration would want to strengthen the Human Foods Program, not gut it?

Who Was Jim Jones, and Why Did He Resign?

Jones spent most of his career at the EPA, specializing in chemical safety and pollution prevention. His expertise in risk assessment, regulatory enforcement, and public health policy made him a strong choice to lead the FDA's Human Foods Program. While at the EPA, he played a key role in modernizing U.S. chemical safety regulations, including overseeing the 2016 reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act, the biggest update to U.S. chemical laws in decades.

But after the layoffs, Jones made it clear that the FDA could no longer do its job. In his resignation letter, he criticized the administration’s "disdain for the very people" essential to improving public health and called the staff cuts "indiscriminate." He described continuing in his role as "fruitless," signaling that he believed the agency was being weakened and stripped of the resources needed to uphold food safety regulations.

Jones was widely respected by both industry leaders and public health advocates.

• Steven Mandernach, Executive Director of the Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO), acknowledged Jones' dedication, stating:

"AFDO acknowledges former Deputy Commissioner Jim Jones’ work on the FDA reorganization and strong commitment to strengthening chemical safety. His decades of public service are greatly appreciated."

• Scott Faber, Senior Vice President of Government Affairs at the Environmental Working Group, emphasized Jones' irreplaceable expertise, stating:

"There is no one on Earth who can replace the chemical safety expertise that [Mr. Jones] brought to [FDA]."

Enter Kyle Diamantas

As a result of Jones’ resignation, Kyle Diamantas, a Florida-based attorney, was appointed as the Acting Deputy Commissioner for Human Foods, effectively replacing Jones in the role.

Unlike Jim Jones, Diamantas lacks significant government experience in food safety, public health, or regulatory enforcement but has a background in food regulatory law. Before his appointment, he was a partner at Jones Day, where he represented major food, cosmetic, dietary supplement, drug, and consumer goods companies. An attorney for “Big Food?” No!

An archived version of his Jones Day bio, accessed via the Wayback Machine by Food Safety Magazine, described him as an experienced advocate with over a decade of advising corporate clients on regulatory matters. The original webpage has since been removed, raising questions about transparency.

Beyond his industry ties, Diamantas is reportedly a hunting buddy of President Trump’s son, Don Jr. His sudden elevation to oversee 80% of the U.S. food supply comes as HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made eliminating conflicts of interest in public health agencies a central talking point. However, the selection of a former industry lawyer with political connections suggests that those concerns may only apply when it involves people outside of their own circle or the MAHA movement.

What Comes Next?

The future of the FDA's Human Foods Program remains uncertain following recent leadership changes and significant staff reductions. Experts warn that these layoffs could severely impair the agency’s ability to ensure food safety and protect public health.

Former Deputy Commissioner Jim Jones highlighted the challenges created by the staff cuts, stating:

"They've created a real pickle for themselves... You just can't do an assessment [of food additives] for free, and you can't ban chemicals by fiat."

Regulatory agencies worldwide rely on scientific assessment, testing, and oversight before banning substances, ensuring that such decisions are evidence-based rather than reactionary. But RFK Jr.'s rhetoric and the MAHA movement's agenda suggest otherwise - that certain food chemicals should be removed from the market immediately, without the typical scientific review process.

From the perspective of evidence-based regulation and food safety, these staff cuts seem counterproductive. But if the goal is to bypass regulatory review entirely and remove additives indiscriminately, then eliminating the very staff responsible for food safety assessments makes perfect sense. The MAHA movement, led by RFK Jr., has focused on removing “chemicals” from food and increasing oversight of additives, yet actual enforcement requires trained scientists, toxicologists, and policy experts, all of whom are now in short supply due to these firings.

Interestingly, in response to widespread criticism, the FDA has reinstated some of the previously terminated employees, including at least ten individuals responsible for reviewing food ingredient safety. Initially, these staff members received termination letters stating that their "ability, knowledge, and skills do not fit the Agency’s current needs" and that their performance was "not adequate to justify further employment." But after backlash from industry stakeholders, public health advocates, and lawmakers, the agency partially reversed course, acknowledging that these experts are critical to food safety oversight.

However, while 10 employees were reinstated, 79 remain fired, meaning that most of the layoffs still stand, leaving critical gaps in an already under-resourced agency. This raises the question:

• If these employees were truly unqualified, why reinstate them?

• If they were essential, why fire them in the first place?

Meanwhile, Kyle Diamantas is now in charge of the Human Foods Program, and with so many staff cuts and shifting priorities, it’s hard to know what direction this is all headed. The MAHA movement has made big promises about food safety reform, but will those actually lead to stronger oversight? Or are we looking at a weakened FDA, with fewer experts making science-based decisions about our food supply?

At this point, a lot is up in the air. A few key things will determine what happens next:
✔ Will more of the fired staff be reinstated? The FDA is already stretched thin, and losing dozens of experts makes real oversight nearly impossible.
✔ How will Diamantas lead the Human Foods Program? So far, we don’t have a clear sense of his priorities, and his background raises a lot of questions.
✔ Is this administration truly committed to food safety, or is this about politics? If it’s the latter, the consequences could be serious.

One thing is certain: this isn’t just about government restructuring or agency leadership. It’s about the safety of the food we all eat. Whether these changes strengthen protections or gut them will have real, lasting consequences for every American.