Health Freedom Act - Prohibits the federal government from preventing the use of a claim describing any nutrient in a food or dietary supplement as mitigating, treating, or preventing any disease, disease symptom, or health-related condition, unless in a final order following a trial on the merits a federal court finds clear and convincing evidence based on qualified expert opinion and published peer-reviewed scientific research that: (1) the claim is false and misleading in any material respect; and (2) there is no less speech restrictive alternative to claim suppression that can render the claim non-misleading.
Amends the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to deem a food or dietary supplement for which a claim characterizing the relationship of a nutrient to a disease or health-related condition not to be included in the definition of "drug" solely because of such claim. Revokes all Food and Drug Administration (FDA) rules prohibiting nutrient-disease relationship claims.
Revises the criteria for deeming a food misbranded when a claim for a nutrient is made.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
Revises dietary supplement labeling exemptions to prohibit the government from preventing distribution of a publication concerning the sale of a food or dietary supplement unless: (1) it establishes that a claim contained in the publication names the specific food or supplement sold and represents that the food or supplement mitigates, treats, or prevents a disease; and (2) the claim is proven to be false and misleading in any material respect by final order of a federal court in accordance with this Act.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.3395 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.3395 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.3395 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.3395 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.