The Texas state senate voted unanimously in favor of a health and wellness bill that—if passed by the state’s house—will mandate daily exercise and nutrition education in public schools, require metabolic health training for all medical professionals, and force food makers to label products containing toxic additives banned in other countries.
The goals of SB 25, aka the Make Texas Healthy Again bill align closely with HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr’s federal level Make America Healthy Again agenda. Think of it as a state-level ‘mini-MAHA.”
All 31 Texas state senators—20 Republicans and 11 Democrats—voted for the bill, authored and promoted by Republican state Sen. Lois Kolkhorst. It is sure to pass the state’s house of representatives, given the enthusiastic bipartisan support for the bill in the Senate, and the fact that house Republicans far outnumber Democrats.
Commonsense Reforms
It already has the blessing of Texas’ lieutenant governor and senate president, Dan Patrick, who called it “a priority of mine because making Texas healthy again is the perfect way to ensure Texans can capitalize on our bright future.”
In a press release following the senate vote, Patrick said, “The commonsense reforms included in SB 25 highlight how important nutrition and exercise are in maintaining overall health. By promoting exercise and educating the public about how damaging ultra-processed foods can be, we can make a positive difference in Texans’ lives.”
Patrick stressed that the population of Texas is growing quickly, and many businesses have relocated there. “It is more important than ever that Texans are fit and healthy to power our state forward.”
Assuming SB 25 passes the Texas house, it would go into effect on September 1, 2025.
Here are its key mandates:
• Exercise in Schools: All school districts must require K-6th grade students to participate in at least 30 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity during each school day. A similar provision applies to kids in grades 6-8, who must have 30 minutes of moderate to vigorous activity every day for at least six semesters. These rules will apply to charter schools as well as standard public schools, and all schools will be prohibited from abrogating recess.
• Texas Nutrition Advisory Committee: Several provisions in the bill center around establishment of a state Nutrition Advisory Committee charged with developing a set of nutritional guidelines for Texas citizens. The committee will be comprised of 7 members, appointed by the governor (currently Greg Abbott). SB 25 stipulates that the committee include: one expert in metabolic health; one licensed physician certified in functional medicine; one member representing the Texas Department of Agriculture; one representing a rural community; and one from an urban community.
The bill also states that not more than two committee members can be affiliated with “an academic or health-related institution of higher education” if there is likely to be a conflict of interest “between the goals of the advisory committee and the goals of the institution.” It also states that committee members cannot hold a 3% or greater ownership stake in a food, beverage, or drug company. It’s worth noting that this exclusionary statement does not mention ownership interest in supplement or personal care companies, nor any other types of companies that might have bearing on public health.
• Nutrition Education in Primary and Secondary Schools: SB 25 requires school districts receiving state funds to develop and implement age-appropriate nutrition curricula in accordance with the guidelines established by the aforementioned Texas Nutrition Advisory Committee.
• Mandatory Nutrition Education in Medical Schools: All medical, nursing, and allied health professional training institutions that receive state funds must develop and implement nutrition and metabolic health training curricula, again in accordance with the Nutrition Advisory Committee’s guidelines. All students studying to become health professionals must complete these curricula.
These professional education programs must include content examining the impact of ultra-processed foods, food colorings, and additives on the risk of chronic diseases, and emphasize “nutritional guidelines based on the consensus of available scientific studies and information concerning diet and nutrition.”
• Mandatory Nutrition CME for Doctors: All physicians applying or re-applying for Texas licensure will be required to complete Continuing Medical Education courses on nutrition and metabolic health. Again, the content of these courses has to meet criteria established by the Texas Nutrition Advisory Committee.
• Labeling for Foods Containing Banned Additives: Under the new law, all packaged foods sold in Texas must include a warning label disclosing the use of any artificial coloring agents, preservatives, food additives, or other chemicals that have been banned in Canada, the UK, or the EU. This disclosure must be printed in a legible font size, and clearly state: “This product contains artificial color or a food additive. Some scientific research suggests artificial colors and food additives may affect individuals with certain health conditions.”
The labels must also state: “WARNING: This product may expose you to [Name of Chemical], which is banned by [Name of Country].” These labels must also refer consumers seeking further information to the appropriate FDA’s web page.
The list of additives that would require special labeling under the new law include: brominated vegetable oils, potassium bromate, propylparaben, azidocarbonamide, butylated hydroxyanisol (BHA), red dye 3, and titanium dioxide.
Shifting Valences
Some of SB 25’s language seems like it could have been cribbed from Ralph Nader’s ‘70s era consumer protection crusades, or Michelle Obama’s national “Let’s Move” program. It’s the sort of stuff one would expect from a left-leaning, regulation-happy state like California, not Texas with its long tradition of balking at government interference in commerce, education, and medical practice.
Indeed, it seems a bit off-brand for staunch Republicans like Kolkhorst, Patrick and other Texas GOP stalwarts to suddenly be caring about what sort of food additives the EU regulators are banning.
But political valences have flipped on several major issues over the last few years, including healthcare. Perhaps our population has gotten sick enough, and medical costs have gotten high enough, that legislators on all sides are finally coming to their senses and starting to look at what’s actually driving the common chronic diseases.
Wins for Functional Medicine
The Texas bill contains several big wins for holistic and functional medicine, namely the requirement that the state’s Nutrition Advisory Committee include at least one certified functional medicine practitioner; the mandates for nutrition and metabolic health education in medical schools; and the requirement for nutrition CME for re-licensure.
Mark Hyman, MD, a leading voice for functional medicine who campaigned for passage of the Texas bill, called it “an historic win.”
In a LinkedIn post immediately following the Senate vote, Hyman wrote: “Food has been at the center of our health crisis for decades—and now it’s finally becoming part of the solution. For far too long, our food system has prioritized corporate profits over public health—fueling an epidemic of obesity, diabetes, and chronic disease while ultra-processed junk fills our schools, hospitals, and grocery stores. The tide is turning.”
But Hyman, a friend of RFK Jr’s, and a prominent advocate for the MAHA movement, stressed that the Texas bill is merely a first step. “Next, we need: More states to follow Texas’ lead. This should be a national movement; Stronger policies to ban toxic additives outright—especially in children’s food; Food system reform that prioritizes real, whole food over ultra-processed junk.”
Side-Stepping Hard Issues
SB 25 does address glaring gaps in nutrition education across the spectrum from elementary school to medical school, and—if implemented and well-enforced—it will train Texas consumers’ attention on potential problems with food additives and with processed foods in general. But the bill deftly avoids important but politically explosive or financially burdensome health issues.
As Dr. Hyman points out, educating people about toxins in their food is one thing. Eliminating those toxins from our food stream by banning them is another.
And why stop with food? There’s plenty of evidence to suggest that air and water pollution are significant drivers of chronic disease. Yet the bill contains nothing that might be considered “environmental policy.”
SB 25 heavily emphasizes the importance of good nutrition. But with the Trump administration’s tariffs and trade wars now in play, grocery costs are skyrocketing, which will make it even more difficult for many people to “eat right.”
The bill’s requirements for K-8 nutrition education are admirable. But Texas legislators did not touch the issue of school lunches, which on a practical day-to-day level could do far more to impress kids about the impact of a healthy diet than classroom lectures ever would.
Compared with Japan, which has the world’s highest nutritional standards for public school lunches, the fare served in most American public schools is pitiful. From a fiscal perspective, healthy school lunches would be a good investment. On average, Japanese school districts spend roughly ¥234 per student per day on lunches. That’s about $1.57, and most of that is spent on the food itself, because labor and facilities costs are typically covered under municipal budgets.
In the US, school lunch programs spend an average of $2.99 per student per day, and only about $1.00 goes to purchasing the ingredients themselves, while $1.99 goes to covering labor and overhead costs.
There are real opportunities to improve childrens’ health by improving school lunch programs. That will require a re-thinking of school and municipal budgets….and possibly taxes, something that’s quite anathema in the current political climate both in Texas and at the national level.
Avoiding the V Word
Also conspicuously absent from the Make Texas Healthy Again bill is the V-word.
Vaccines are a highly contentious issue, and one which is central to Kennedy’s MAHA movement. But it is a divisive topic, even among people who agree with the many of general principles of the MAHA movement.
State senator Lois Kolkhorst, the sponsor of SB 25, is a strong conservative who supported state legislation blocking Texas businesses and government offices from requiring proof of vaccination during the Covid pandemic. So, she is certainly willing to question conventional public health doctrine about vaccines. But her bill side-steps the issue completely, which is understandable.
SB 25 seems to be about finding common bipartisan ground on broad-stroke health and wellness measures that few would oppose (so long as they don’t cost too much to implement or impose undue burdens on businesses). From that perspective, it may also serve as (ahem) a test kitchen for RFK Jr and his HHS colleagues as they work to implement their MAHA principles on a national scale.
END
