GLP-1 Drugs, UPFs, Labeling Issues Continue to Hound Food and Beverage Companies

Lewin:
There are definitely going to be some significant shifts. In the past, companies like Kraft and Mondelez would have months or even years to develop variations of products before bringing them to market.

What we’ve seen over the last 10 to 15 years is a dramatic shift happening in a much shorter period of time — either through internal R&D or through acquisitions of companies already doing this work.

At Rutgers Food Innovation Center, we’ve seen a dramatic move toward wellness and better-for-you, food-as-medicine products being introduced almost daily. And there’s really not a lot that’s truly “new” that can be invented in food and beverage. It’s more about how products are developed and marketed to show real health benefits while still being enjoyable.

That’s where those two things have to meet.

Dyes, Sugar & Ingredient Reformulation

Hanacek:
Did anything surprise you in the guidelines? And do you see indicators of where regulation might head next?

Lewin:
Everyone’s talking about banning red and yellow dyes, which I think is overdue. Europe banned many of them long ago. There’s no reason to have them in American-made products.

From a nutritional standpoint, if you’re going to have a drink, instead of 42 grams of sugar in a cola, can you get it down to 5 or 10 calories with some natural sugar component?

Artificial sweeteners are popular, but they often have a flavor downside — that aftertaste from stevia, erythritol, monk fruit. Consumers want authenticity in taste. So we’re seeing some movement away from those options because flavor still matters most.

Will U.S. Companies Need to Catch Up?

Hanacek:
Since many large companies already make European-compliant products, have they already moved away from these ingredients? Or will some need to catch up if reformulation becomes necessary in the U.S.?

Lewin:
Many large companies understand the need to move away from artificial colors and additives. Nutritional aspects are increasingly important.

But what we’re seeing — especially as an early-stage incubator — is that each state is getting involved in labeling regulations. That could become a major issue. Nationwide brands shouldn’t have to create different labels for every state. Logistically, that’s a nightmare.

Ideally, the FDA steps in to ensure consistent nationwide standards rather than having Texas, California or Florida regulating differently.

Ultimately, the consumer decides. If it doesn’t taste good, they won’t buy it again — regardless of how clean the ingredient list is. Taste and ingredient transparency have to come together.

Fortification Trends: Is Fiber the New Protein?

Hanacek:
On the fortification side, it seems like everything has protein added now. And I’m hearing that fiber may be the “new protein” for 2026 and 2027.

Are you seeing fiber emerge? What else is bubbling up?

Lewin:
Fiber has always been an issue — most Americans don’t get nearly enough.

With GLP-1 drugs reducing overall food intake, we’re seeing nutrient deficiencies emerge because people are simply eating less. So fiber absolutely becomes more important.

We’ve had fiber cereals and products like Metamucil for decades, but now we’re seeing clearer medical benefits tied to fiber and gut health.

Protein is everywhere, but there’s also the question of efficacy. How much protein actually gets absorbed? That depends on the source.

What we’re seeing now is a combination of high fiber, high protein, probiotics, prebiotics, more natural ingredients, and fewer artificial ones. We’re moving in the right direction — toward a better food ecosystem that’s less reliant on highly processed fast foods.

Navigating the Ultraprocessed Debate

Hanacek:
The ultraprocessed versus less-processed debate continues. How should processors position themselves? Is the path clear?

Lewin:
I think it’s pretty clear.

As vice president of the New Jersey Food Processors Association, I work with companies that understand they need to move toward less super-processed products — more natural ingredients, higher protein, higher fiber, more vitamins, minerals and antioxidants.

To simplify it: if you add vitamin C, you can call it an antioxidant. There are many naturally derived components that can enhance products.

As a country, we need to move toward less processed food that’s naturally better for you. That reduces obesity, diabetes and other health issues.

Yes, companies make money on highly processed foods. But we can make great-tasting foods using better-for-you ingredients. We’ve done it before, and we can continue doing it.

Food Safety: Recalls, Labeling & Technology

What’s Behind Recent Recalls?

Hanacek:
Food safety has quieted slightly, but we’ve seen some high-profile recalls recently. Any common factors processors should learn from?

Lewin:
There have always been recalls. What’s different now is increased testing. When you look harder, you find more.

Aside from outbreaks like romaine E. coli or listeria in cantaloupe — which are improving thanks to field-level traceability — most recalls are due to mislabeling, particularly undeclared allergens.

The product may not be inherently dangerous, but failing to list dairy or peanuts can be life-threatening for certain consumers.

Sanitation and detection technologies have improved dramatically. Many recalls today involve small volumes or labeling inconsistencies.

Investing in Safety Technology

Hanacek:
Are companies investing more in labeling accuracy and inspection systems?

Lewin:
Absolutely. With 5G and sensor technology, we’re seeing real-time monitoring in plants and even in fields.

Costs have come down, making advanced safety systems more accessible. Tools like Red Zone track production efficiencies and predict equipment failures — like detecting a worn bearing before metal shavings enter product.

More predictive technology means fewer problems.

AI & Digital Twin Technology

Hanacek:
What about AI, machine learning and digital tools?

Lewin:
Rutgers is collaborating with Rowan University, UC Riverside and Wisconsin on digital twin technology — creating virtual replicas of processing lines.

We use predictive analytics to compare what could happen versus what is happening in real time. It’s about solving problems before they occur.

The technology is coming. Absolutely.

Hanacek:
What needs to happen to accelerate adoption?

Lewin:
Pricing. As costs come down, adoption increases.

High-pressure processing (HPP) is a great example. Twelve years ago, it cost $1.50 to $2.00 per unit to treat hummus. Today, it’s 20 to 40 cents. As more machines entered the market, costs dropped and safety improved.

Sanitation: Technology vs. Human Execution

Hanacek:
Is sanitation improvement driven more by technology or training?

Lewin:
You can automate parts of cleaning, but because of complex manufacturing systems — kettles, pumps, chillers — there will always be places bacteria can hide.

Some pathogens thrive in cold environments, so refrigeration alone doesn’t guarantee safety.

Ultimately, it comes down to human oversight and validation. If you don’t verify sanitation, you increase your risk.

Regulatory Outlook Under the Current Administration

Hanacek:
Are there regulatory shifts processors should watch heading into 2026?

Lewin:
We’re seeing some repositioning. When Robert Kennedy flipped the food chart upside down and emphasized butter and red meat, that surprised me.

Historically, we’ve been told to reduce red meat and saturated fats. But ultimately, consumers will decide.

Moderation is key. Eat a steak every day for three months, and you probably won’t feel great. The closer food is to its natural state — without excess sodium and sugar — the better from a nutritional standpoint.

But it still has to taste good.

Government guidelines can offer direction, but when consumers face 20 varieties of cookies, they’ll choose based on availability, price and taste.

I don’t think we’ll see as dramatic an impact as some expect. Consumers will still choose what they want.