
Feature|Articles|October 13, 2026
- Nutritional Outlook Vol. 29., No. 8
- Volume 29
- Issue 8
FDA’s Proposed GRAS Rule, and What Industry Should Do Now
Author(s)Ashish R. Talati
The proposed notification requirement is straightforward, but its legal and commercial consequences are not.
Advertisement
Advertisement
On August 10, 2026, FDA proposed a rule that would generally make GRAS notification mandatory. Companies could still reach independent GRAS conclusions, but they would largely lose the option of keeping those conclusions private. For industry, the proposal raises important questions about FDA’s legal authority, the treatment of existing ingredients, and what greater scrutiny could mean for bringing products to market.
Related to this article

Todd Harrison, co-chair of the FDA practice group at Venable LLP, explains how California’s AB 2779 changes date-labeling requirements for supplements, why stability testing matters, and how companies can navigate evolving state rules while advocating for federal uniformity.

FDA's final NDI guidance sets identity and safety expectations. See what AHPA and CRN say remains unresolved and what it means for suppliers.

The agency’s editorial identifies needs across six areas, including new methods for novel products, gut microbiome data, and AI-supported risk assessment.

The Council for Responsible Nutrition says its Morning Consult survey also found that three in four adults use supplements and that cost is the most commonly cited barrier.

The trade group says the denial does not settle its concerns about a law that limits minors' access to supplements marketed for weight loss or muscle building, and the case now returns to district court.

A year-to-date look at the federal and state measures shaping supplement oversight, access, and classification.

A panel at The Outlook on Active Nutrition discussed quality in sports nutrition focused on testing, liability, and what buyers now expect from suppliers.
Advertisement
Advertisement

