Why the U.S. government wants to ban artificial food dyes

Eight petroleum-based food dyes will be leaving the food supply in the next two years, according to an announcement that U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made Tuesday.

He was joined at the podium by Food and Drug Administration director Marty Makary, National Institutes of Health director Jay Bhattacharya and other public officials.

The plan calls for the food industry to move to what Makary called “natural alternatives.”

Kennedy chronicled a long list of illnesses faced by children that he said were not part of the nomenclature when he was growing up: an epidemic of being overweight, illnesses normally not seen until at least adulthood, girls reaching puberty early, immune diseases, autism, ADHD and others.

“We are spending as much on chronic disease as on the military budget,” Kennedy said.

Choosing to tackle food dye additives is a “no brainer,” Kennedy said. “Nobody wants to eat petroleum.” He said, “President Trump wants dramatic change in the next two years and we’re going to deliver that for him.” He added that if people do want to eat petroleum, “they should add it themselves at home.”

Where are dyes in the food supply?

Scientific American said that the FDA had certified nine color additives for foods. The Biden administration banned Red No. 3 from the food supply, as Deseret News reported in January, under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act’s Delaney Clause over possible links to cancer found in mouse studies. The clause said something shown to cause cancer in animals could be banned even without confirming the same impact in humans.

Kennedy is focusing on the other eight artificial food dyes, which the Center for Science in the Public Interest calls “a rainbow of risks.” Those eight are Blue No. 1 and Blue No. 2, Citrus Red No. 2, Green No. 3, Orange B, Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5 and Yellow No. 6.

According to Yahoo Life, “HHS and the FDA said it is requesting that food companies stop using red dye No. 3 ahead of the previously established 2027-28 deadline. The agencies also outlined a plan to revoke authorization for two other synthetic food dyes, Citrus Red No. 2 and Orange B, in the coming months. They said they plan to phase out the six remaining artificial food colorings, including Red No. 40, from the U.S. food supply by the end of next year.”

The dyes are largely used because they’re cheap, that article said. And the dyes are found in everything from candies to cereals to over-the-counter medications.

Harmful to human health, behavior?

Scientific American noted that “older animal studies have associated some blue, yellow and red dyes with risks of tumor development and neurotoxicity. Some research suggests the neurotoxicity may contribute to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.”

Per the article, “Direct exposure has only been tested in animals. Human data have been mostly limited to population or epidemiological studies — in which participants have been asked to recall and self-report the foods they’ve eaten. This has led some scientists to say there is not enough information to make conclusions about food dyes’ potential health threats.”

Dose is one of the challenges. The Wall Street Journal looked at U.S. Department of Agriculture food products and found 10% had at least one artificial dye and that, of those, 40% had multiple dyes. According to the Journal, 29% of pickles, for example, had Yellow No. 5 added, while 38% of pickled sushi ginger had Red No. 40. Twenty percent of premade pie crusts had Yellow No. 5 or No. 6.

Combinations of dyes can make it hard to assess precisely how much artificial dye is being consumed.

“The seven most commonly found in foods today are Yellow 5 and 6, Red 3 and 40, Green 3, and Blue 1 and 2. Among those, Red 40 appears in the largest share of products, totaling around 39,000,” per the Journal study. Yellow 5 is in 35.5% of the products containing dye, the article said.

The FDA has previously maintained that food colorings used at the allowable levels are not risky for people.

Growing opposition to artificial coloring

Despite claims by big food companies that not enough studies have been done to say the dyes are a health risk, Makary told the Times, “My feeling is, why gamble with the health of our children? We have some data points. We have some observational studies. We believe that these artificial food chemicals are implicated. My feeling is, Why not err on the side of safety? Why say, ‘Let’s just take the risk because the vibrance of the colors is so appealing, it’s worth it.’”

“Food companies have recently started using butterfly pea flower extract and spirulina, an algae, to create blue colors, and chlorophyll or matcha to make green,” the Journal reported.

The article noted that foods that are naturally colorful, like purple cabbage or beets or turmeric, could impact flavor or be difficult to get a consistent color with when they are substituted.

The U.S. is not the only country to tackle artificial colors in food, by any means.

As The New York Times reports, in Canada, Fruit Loops get their colors from blueberries and carrots, while the U.S. version is colored by Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5 and Blue No. 1.

BBC quoted Dr. Peter Lurie, a former FDA official who heads the center. He said artificial dyes are added to foods solely to make money for food companies. “Food dyes help make ultra-processed foods more attractive, especially to children, often by masking the absence of a colorful ingredient, like fruit. We don’t need synthetic dyes in the food supply, and no one will be harmed by their absence.”

States take on artificial dyes

States have also started tackling the issue, including California and West Virginia.

California has taken it seriously for a while: In 2021, the state’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment issued a report that said federal limits on synthetic food dyes might not adequately protect children’s behavioral health. “The levels were established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration decades ago and do not reflect newer research,” the California agency said in a news release.

It noted that some children may be more sensitive than others. But since the dyes are cosmetic and have no nutritional value, critics say that any risk is too much risk.

Because of rising levels of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders (ADHD) and other behavioral challenges among children, California’s legislature asked the agency to study whether there’s a link to food dye.

“Evidence shows that synthetic food dyes are associated with adverse neurobehavioral outcomes in some children,” said OEHHA Director Dr. Lauren Zeise. “With increasing numbers of U.S. children diagnosed with behavioral disorders, this assessment can inform efforts to protect children from exposures that may exacerbate behavioral problems.”

Per Yahoo Life, “The researchers ultimately found that 16 out of 25 studies analyzed found a link between kids who had the dyes and poor behavior. That link was also considered statistically significant in more than half of the studies.”

The California health agency also teamed up with scientists at University of California Berkeley and UC Davis “to estimate the levels of exposure to synthetic food dyes by U.S. children of varying ages as well as pregnant women and women of childbearing age. The research team found that children are exposed to multiple dyes in a day, and that the highest exposures are usually from juice drinks and soft drinks.”

Texas this month began looking into marketing claims by Kellogg that its products are “healthy,” since they contain petroleum-based artificial food colorings, as the Times and others reported.

Companies have experience removing the artificial dyes, which are not allowed in products sold in the European Union. Kraft’s boxed macaroni and cheese, for instance, uses paprika, annatto and turmeric in place of the yellow dyes used in the U.S.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest has applauded efforts to remove artificial dyes for foods, but in a statement noted that cuts made at the behest of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency might make it harder to police the food supply.

Change could be slow

Axios warns that announcing plans for a ban is not the same as making it happen. Some companies — including General Mills, candymaker Mars and PepsiCo, for instance — “sent cooperative signals but stopped short of endorsing a ban.”

Bloomberg reported that the Consumer Brands Association, a food industry trade association, had proposed a voluntary phaseout of synthetic dyes, including removing them from food in schools and proposing that they get tariff exemptions in return, per Axios.

Kennedy hinted that this is just a first step in changing the U.S. food supply to make eating healthier, which is part of his Make America Healthy Again plans.

There are “shockingly few studies even on food dyes,” he said, adding that is “poison” and Americans should be eating “zero.”

Kennedy also announced the administration and the agencies he oversees will be offering grants to study food ingredients, leading to further “appropriate action.” But asked about whether labeling of products was appropriate, Kennedy said congressional action is required to change that.

FDA Commissioner Makary said he “believes in love” and is working collaboratively with the food manufacturers at this point to get the dyes out of edible products. He would like to see the companies remove the dyes voluntarily.