Podcast Summary: Kris Sollid—What Does Consumer Sentiment Say About the Safety of the U.S. Food Supply?

Podcast: Food Safety Matters
Host: Food Safety Magazine (Stacy Acheson—A, Adrienne Blum—B)
Guest: Kris Sollid, Senior Director for Research and Consumer Insights, International Food Information Council (IFIC)—C
Date: October 30, 2025

Episode Overview

This special bonus episode dives into American consumer attitudes towards the safety of the U.S. food supply, drawing upon recent survey data from IFIC. Host Adrienne Blum interviews Kris Sollid about key findings, including a historic drop in consumer confidence, drivers behind changing perception, and what industry and government can do to restore trust. The episode addresses the impact of food recalls, the GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) program, and the influence of contemporary health movements.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. IFIC Food and Health Survey: Methodology

• Survey Background: The IFIC Food and Health Survey is an annual online study, conducted every spring since 2006, aiming to reflect the U.S. population (ages 18–80, sample size 3,000, weighted to census data).
• Methodology Note: A new set of respondents is polled each year to capture broad perspectives, though demographic balancing allows for generalization.
• Online Bias: All participants are Internet-enabled, which is a caveat for interpretation.
  • Quote (Kris Sollid, 03:58): “Our sample size is 3,000 Americans, so it’s a pretty robust sample … and we reflect the demographics of this population to match the Current Population Survey.”

2. Historic Decline in Consumer Confidence

• 13-Year Low: Consumer confidence in the safety of the U.S. food supply has dropped steeply—now at 55%, down from 70% in 2023 and 62% in 2024.
• Universal Decline: The decline cuts across all demographic groups (generation, income, gender, education, ethnicity).
  • Quote (Kris Sollid, 08:39): “This is not unique to one portion of our survey or segment of our population… This is a common theme, no matter [the demographic].”
• Tracking Confidence: Confidence was stable from 2012 to just a few years ago, but has eroded significantly in the last three years.

3. Drivers of Low Confidence: Profits Over Safety

• Perceptions: Among those with low confidence, 59% believe food industry profits outweigh safety, 54% doubt all parts of the food system work together, and 46% view government regulation as insufficient.
  • Quote (Blum, 05:32): “Among those who reported low confidence, 59% believed that the food industry profits are prioritized over safety…”
• Rising Concern: This perception has grown slightly since first tracked in 2023 (~55%); it is now the leading rationale for distrust among those expressing a lack of confidence.
  • Quote (Sollid, 11:13): “…It is the leading reason of those that we offer people to respond to... those that lack confidence in the safety of the food supply cite that profit.”

4. Corporate, Systemic, and Regulatory Trust

• Desire for Transparency: Consumers want more information about how both industry and government ensure food safety—both proactive efforts and reactive responses (e.g., recalls).
  • Quote (Blum, 14:36): “It kind of sounds like...consumers are expressing a need or a want for more truthful and transparent education from both government and industry about the safety of the food supply.”
• Dual Expectations: Consumers expect both companies and regulators to play roles in safety, and seek clarity in their actions.
• Education Challenge: The gap between media coverage and the scientific basis for regulatory or formulation changes is a recurring challenge.
  • Quote (Sollid, 15:24): “...it’s important to help reassure the consumer that it isn’t necessarily always a safety concern. That way they are reassured because the expectation is that the food... at the grocery store is safe to consume.”

5. Impact of Food Recalls on Perceptions

• Survey Findings: 43% of low-confidence respondents cite “too many recalls” as a top concern.
• Recall Reality vs. Perception: Most Americans (three out of four) think recalls are increasing, but data shows recalls have declined over the past decade (especially FDA-regulated products).
• Severity vs. Frequency: Public awareness may focus on the most severe/high-profile recalls, influencing opinion more than total recall numbers, most of which are precautionary rather than actual threats.
  • Quote (Sollid, 17:40): “Overall, you're seeing food recalls come down over time, but the consumer perception might not necessarily match that.”
• Recall Causes: Most recalls are related to allergens or labeling issues, not foodborne illness.
  • Quote (Blum, 19:35): “…as you just pointed out, at odds with really what FDA and USDA are reporting with their data…”

6. Perceptions of FDA’s GRAS Program

• Awareness Gap: Only about a quarter of those attributing food safety concern to ingredients are familiar with GRAS; a recent spotlight survey found ~50% awareness, but the discrepancy highlights confusion.
• Perceived Effectiveness: Among those aware of GRAS, 65% view it as effective; only 16% as ineffective—a 50-point positive gap.
  • Quote (Sollid, 23:34): “Among those who had heard of the program, 65% said they thought it was effective and while only 16% viewed it as ineffective.”
• Potential Changes: With ongoing regulatory debate, awareness and trust in such programs are expected to fluctuate.

7. Influence of Health Movements & Ingredient Focus

• Government & Public Focus: Initiatives like “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) and the Secretary’s priorities (e.g., on additives, dyes, seed oils) raise both awareness and anxiety.
• Longstanding Interest: Current concerns predate MAHA but are brought to greater prominence, fostering both constructive dialogue and potential misconceptions.
  • Quote (Sollid, 26:18): “These conversations are not necessarily beginning with the Make America Healthy Again movement. They've certainly elevated their prominence...”
• Communication Need: Reformulations or removal of ingredients may be interpreted as admissions of past risk, even when changes reflect supply, demand, or updated best practices rather than safety issues.
• Key Challenge: Bridging the communication gap between regulatory/evidence-based decisions and consumer understanding.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Transparency and Education:
  C, 14:55: “Absolutely. I think that our data anyway would indicate that there is a need or a desire for consumers to understand a little bit more of the details—what is happening.”
• On Recalls:
  C, 20:02: “…regardless of the reason for the recall, the majority of recalls, they're often voluntary and precautionary. They're not necessarily indicating always that there is actually a problem.”
• On Communication:
  C, 28:26: “So it's really important for science communicators, for regulators, for any stakeholder... to really help the consumer understand that it's not just about safety. In most cases, this is a response to trying to improve the healthfulness of the average American's diet.”

Timestamps for Important Segments

| Segment | Timestamp | |-------------------------------------------------|--------------| | Introduction & Guest Background | 00:10–01:20 | | IFIC Food & Health Survey Methodology | 02:07–05:22 | | Declining Consumer Confidence | 06:20–09:20 | | Profits vs. Safety Discussion | 09:46–11:59 | | Systemic/Government Trust Issues | 11:59–14:36 | | Call for Transparency & Consumer Education | 14:36–16:23 | | Recalls: Perceptions & Reality | 16:47–21:50 | | GRAS Program Awareness and Trust | 22:54–25:09 | | Influence of Health Movements (MAHA, Sec. Kennedy) | 25:09–28:55 | | Final Reflections and Closing | 28:55–29:38 |

Conclusion

This episode provides a deep and data-rich examination of current American consumer confidence in food safety, with input from IFIC’s Kris Sollid. The main takeaways are a troubling, broad-based erosion of trust in the U.S. food system; significant consumer skepticism about both industry and government priorities; and an ongoing call for increased transparency and scientifically grounded communication. Topics from food recalls to ingredient regulations are revealed to be both points of confusion and opportunity for improved public understanding.

For additional details and to access the full IFIC Food and Health Survey, visit foodinsight.org.