2 quotes from the article address that:

"The FDA does not exist to get products on the market. It exists to keep products off the market. They have no idea how to get a product to market; that’s just not what they do."

"So what they are doing, in an emergency, is allowing, out of the kindness of their hearts, for manufacturers to apply for the ability to temporarily import their products once the FDA explicitly approves them, on a case-by-case basis. When the problem was something completely irrelevant like listing ingredients in the wrong order, the FDA plans to (eventually) approve such an application, which will be good until November. If the issue is a trivial argument over something other than labeling, well, tough."

I highly recommend reading the whole article. It's a really well written "rant". (I say "rant" because you can hear the anger in the writing, but it is well researched and written regardless.)

I gave up on the article about a quarter way through when they trivialized that labels may be in Dutch or German and the intended water to formula ratios are 1:1 instead of 1:2. That would mean an infant getting one half the calories a parent thinks they are, which does not seem trivial to me.

They could just add a sticker with directions in English, including the formula ratio. The only babies that would suffer are those whose parents don't follow basic directions when preparing their food - and those babies are likely in for a rough time anyway.

It seems crazy to think that a different formula ratio is so important it should necessitate a shortage of vital baby formula.

> That would mean an infant getting one half the calories a parent thinks they are, which does not seem trivial to me.

As opposed to none?

Again, there is a shortage. Thus the poorer end of the spectrum will go without.

Once American families get access to European formula, they will demand similar levels of quality from American producers, or parallel import from Europe directly.

American manufacturers will need to do better than releasing junk products, which will impact profit margins.

50% of infant formula in the USA is purchased by the US Government and distributed to welfare recipients. Industry and Government are aligned in ensuring formula is as cheap as possible.

> Why would they block a healthier option?

Labeling? I mean that's the assinine reason the FDA is giving anyway.

> This must be incompetence or corruption.

Probably that and a bureaucracy that's unwilling to relinquish its power in any way. Really pretty disgusting.

> the dorito mix formula sold in the US.

I couldn't agree more, and I love the wording. The FDA is hardly `protecting` us here.

>If I was a parent in the US I'd be looking for an underground formula railroad

Yep - we found a company in Florida that was importing formula from Germany at a reasonable premium. Keep in mind that this was 4 years ago, so I don't know the state of that pipeline today.

That’s dairy/soy/corn subsidies for you

Just FYI, it's a conspiracy theory to suggest that seed oils and other processed chemicals are somehow unhealthy.

If I'm reading the response chain right, you're actually not saying it's untrue, just that criticizing veg oils is something that people will call you a conspiracy theorist for suggesting?

Cause if so, I'm kinda with you. I definitely think veg oils are awful for health, and have basically been called crazy for saying so.

Not much conspiracy there though excepting maybe the main thematic one which is that unhealthful stuff is foisted on the populace to keep them dumb and compliant.

Yup, we’re on the same page on both counts.

...is this a kind of thing people say? If you have something to argue about the healthiness of certain foods, make your argument.

> is this a kind of thing people say?

Is what a thing people say?

Just point to something and say "that thing you said is something other people have said, and I call those people conspiracy theorists, which presumably means something to me, but probably isn't the literal definition of conspiracy theorist, because there's no actual conspiracy in something being unhealthy inherently, and so don't say that thing."

Basically, completely avoiding the object level and jumping to a meta discussion that can only be political and not further the discussion.

How is a government agency blocking imports of food that parents wish to buy for their children not a political topic?

It would be disingenuous at this stage in our society to make the case that speech is not heavily regulated and often labeled as conspiracy (and worse) when it runs counter to corporate and establishment narratives. Hence, the metapolitical comment.