As President Joe Biden tries to restore abysmal approval numbers ahead of the midterm elections, his handpicked FDA commissioners are doing him no favors. After a string of recent failures regarding baby food shortages and its now anti-scientific and strict banning stance on nicotine products, the FDA is stepping back to preserve what’s left of its credibility.

The latest move in this cleanup attempt came when the FDA announced that the Reagan-Udall Foundation was being brought in to review key offices in the food and tobacco division. Although technically independent, Congress created this organization to “advance the FDA’s mission” and has maintained close ties with the FDA’s leadership. With Democrats controlling both the House and Senate, it’s unlikely the group will hold the Biden-led FDA accountable for its many mistakes and failures.

If the FDA wants to return to its mission and avoid potential investigations under the 2023 Republican Congress, it will need to refocus public health on science rather than media games to raise public awareness. I have.

Last September, the FDA received a whistleblower complaint about contamination of a baby formula plant justifying an investigation and possible recall. It took the FDA nearly four months for him just to request an interview with the whistleblower. Once the recall was established, the FDA had little plan to make up the shortfall. Given that 80% of all infant formula stocks are supported by only his two companies, one of which was subject to a recall, a shortage was inevitable, but what could the agency do? Somehow caught off guard, infants across the country were put in a life-or-death situation.

Instead of focusing on solving the infant formula crisis, which continues to be a problem, the FDA will instead roll out a series of tobacco-related decisions that are not backed by science, turning media headlines into a quick win. obtained.

In June, the FDA announced an across-the-board reduction in nicotine levels in cigarettes to reduce the effects of smoking. But this decision deviates from both science and common sense. Lowering nicotine levels makes one cigarette less addictive, but many smokers simply smoke more to satisfy their cravings. More cigarettes means smokers inhale more harmful chemicals and carcinogens, ultimately responsible for the majority of related health problems.

To make matters worse, the FDA combined this decision with Juul’s premarket tobacco product application (PMTA) denial, effectively removing the product from the market. Again, unfounded decisions by government agencies are counterintuitive for public health protection. Considering the ill effects of combustible tobacco, many e-cigarette products like Juul offer a less harmful alternative that can provide smokers with nicotine modification without many of the harmful by-products.

These two actions led many Americans in various segments of politics to question the FDA’s motives. The FDA issued a suspension on their decision after saying the unique circumstances of Juul’s application “justified additional review.”

If FDA’s decision is not based on a complete and thorough review of the application and available evidence, the following questions arise: Why did the FDA announce its decision in the first place?

The FDA’s crackdown on nicotine products also doesn’t live up to leftist conventional wisdom about other addictive drugs. Biden’s response to the staggering rate of drug overdoses was to invest in harm reduction programs, including $30 million in pandemic relief packages for initiatives such as clean needle replacement and crack pipes.

Hypocrisy is amazing. The Biden administration has no problem advancing strategies to reduce harm to opioid and crack addicts, but it’s unclear why the FDA continues to sell outright bans as the solution to smoking.

Smokers trying to quit need safer alternatives during the transition. An agency cannot regain trust as long as it actively reverses its own decisions and contradicts government efforts elsewhere. It’s up to Secretary Robert Calif and FDA officials to follow science and adopt harm reduction in cancer to protect public health.