Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vaccine Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill to require disclosure if vaccines are intentionally added to food
Summary
Lawmakers advanced HB 84 after testimony from public‑health groups and residents; the substitute narrows the measure to require disclosure only where a vaccine is intentionally added to food and clarifies regulatory authority.
Representative Lee presented HB 84 and a substitute that would require disclosure if human vaccines or agents intended to affect human biological function are intentionally introduced into food. He and supporters said the bill would not ban the technology but would require transparency if such products reach the market. "It's not saying you couldn't do it. It's just saying that if it is going to happen ... that we would have that transparency," Lee said.
Committee members asked technical questions about whether research in this area is active and how the measure would interact with existing federal review. Several members and public commenters noted that research into oral or plant‑based vaccine delivery exists at universities and in some international trials. The Utah Public Health Association testified that existing FDA and USDA regimes already regulate foods and biologicals sold in interstate commerce and stressed the need for informed consent and evidence‑based policy.
Public commenters raised a range of concerns. A Davis County resident representing the Utah Public Health Association's Immunization Advocacy Coalition said the FDA and USDA already regulate vaccines and foods and urged careful coordination; a physician with a public‑health degree told the committee she did not see a regulatory gap that required this bill. Other residents urged passage, citing long‑standing research into plant‑based vaccine delivery and possible nanotechnology and mRNA research in animals.
The committee adopted the first substitute and then voted to forward the substitute HB 84 with a favorable recommendation on a voice vote. Committee members said the substitute tightened the bill language (for example by requiring that any vaccine be "intentionally" placed in food for the disclosure requirement to apply) and addressed concerns raised by stakeholders.
The substitute specifies that if a vaccine, as regulated by state and federal law, is intentionally introduced into food for human consumption the product should be treated under the relevant regulatory framework and labeled; it does not change FDA or USDA authority. The committee sent the bill forward for further consideration.
