HHS, FDA, and USDA Extend Comment Period for Data and Information on Ultra-Processed Foods

WASHINGTON (FDA) — Today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) are extending the comment period by 30 days for the Request for Information on ultra-processed foods.

On July 24, 2025, the FDA and USDA issued a joint Request for Information to gather information and data to help establish a federally recognized uniform definition for ultra-processed foods—a critical step in providing increased transparency to consumers about the foods they eat.

The original comment period was scheduled to close on September 23, 2025. In response to requests for an extension, we are extending the comment period by 30 days, until October 23, 2025, to allow interested persons additional time to submit comments.

Comments can be submitted via the Federal eRulemaking Portal to docket FDA-2025-N-1793.

For More Information

Press Release provided by the Food and Drug Administration.

Related Stories
Dr. Gold encouraged farmers and ranchers to prioritize eye safety in their daily routines, offering his expertise to help reduce risks on this week’s Rural Health Matters.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, in consultation with the U.S. Department of Energy and under the Clean Air Act, approved the temporary measure to help stabilize fuel supplies and reduce costs for consumers.
As farmers and ranchers navigate rising input costs, lawmakers are considering a roughly $15 billion aid package to help, which would be tied to the spending bill for the war with Iran.
After devastating wildfires swept through Nebraska, Sen. Deb Fischer is championing a bill to expedite the relief process for farmers and ranchers. She joins us with updates on recovery efforts, conditions on the ground, and how the ag community has stepped up to help.
Policy clarity will determine the trajectory of soybean crush demand, but producers in Kansas have shown that expanding local crush capacity strengthens basis and marketing options.
The Mengel Dairy Farms case is a sobering reminder that “having insurance” is not the same as “having protection.”