Since its beginnings the FDA has always genuflected to business. Many people in the department worked hard to document toxins that the American public were being exposed to (e.g. arsenic and coal tar used as food coloring, formaldehyde and borax used to preserve milk and meat). However the department's leadership, and in a few cases the U.S. President, intervened to protect business interests. If you're interested check out The Poison Squad[1].

[1] https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/312067/the-poison-s...

They don't refuse, they need sufficient evidence. They have banned different phtalates before.

They already have the evidence- at least on some of these. Three of the phtalates they've already banned previously in children's toys are part of the nine that they're continuing to allow for use in food packaging

What caused this change? Regulatory capture? Political reasons? Good old corruption?

Regulatory capture is a big part of it, the current head of the FDA has very close ties to the pharmaceutical industry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Califf#Relationships_wi...

Driven by monopolization. It's one of the side effects that's rarely explored in the FTC and DOJ "analysis" of these mergers over the past few decades. That there are only three domestic suppliers controlling 90% of the market seems like it could be the root of these particular issues and is what allows such seamless regulatory capture in the first place.

> "Over the past decade or two, the FDA has completely and comprehensively abrogated their regulatory duties."

The FDA, FTC, FCC, EPA, and a whole bunch of other "TLA" alphabet soup agencies …

Yeah, but, there's a certain class of injectable drugs we should always trust them on, no matter what. Always and forever, and never doubt them, because doubt alone is a conspiracy.