The use of a prominent red food dye commonly found in a variety of American food and drink items may be on the brink of prohibition, pending a decision by U.S. federal regulators. An active petition currently under the consideration by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) contends the use of this synthetic additive, known as red dye No. 3. This dye is responsible for adding an enticing cherry-red hue to an array of goods consumed regularly by American households.
Despite the FDA’s previous occasions of affirming the safety of red No. 3, alongside various other approved additives, there has been a call from numerous quarters advocating for its ban. The primary motive behind this proposition stems from the concern that the synthetic colorant could potentially induce cancer and result in behavioral alterations in children.
Jim Jones, who serves as the deputy commissioner for human foods at the FDA, openly admitted at a Senate hearing that the last safety evaluation of this synthetic color additive took place over ten years ago. Currently, a proposition demanding the revocation of the authorization board stands before them. Jones expressed optimism about the possibility of taking action on the matter in weeks to come.
Red No. 3 is produced from petroleum and lends a characteristic bright red color to food and beverage offerings. It’s worth noting that this particular food dye has been largely outlawed in the European Union and is a subject of scrutiny from activists and public health groups due to its associated health risks.
Extensive research output has demonstrated a correlation between Red No. 3 and hyperactive behavior in children. Moreover, it has also been implicated in inducing cancerous effects in animals. However, sufficient data linking the additive to cancer in humans is currently lacking.
The list of lawmakers who wish to see this food dye banned is steadily growing, with Frank Pallone, Jr. recently joining their ranks. Pallone succinctly emphasized his main concern about the additive, saying that its only function seems to be to deceive consumers by altering the color of their food to enhance appeal.
Pallone further expressed alarm at the ubiquity of this chemical, especially during the holiday season when consumption of sweet treats is at its peak. Despite the chemical being banned from use in the cosmetic industry within the U.S. since 1990, its presence in the food industry persists unabated.
Interestingly, the FDA maintains a dual regulation protocol for the usage of Red No. 3. The first specifically relates to the consumption of food, while the other pertains to ingested medication. Precise regulations dictate the precise products where additions like Red No. 3 are permitted, the maximum permissible quantities, and how such food dyes need to be labelled.
In 1990, due to the Delaney Clause, the FDA took action and prohibited the use of Red No. 3 in cosmetics and topical drugs. This prohibition was a direct result of accumulated evidence suggesting the dye promoted carcinogenic effects in lab rats. However, in the absence of any conclusive evidence tying the additive to similar effects in humans, the FDA has refrained from banning it from food items.
In an unprecedented move in 2023, California became the pioneer state to prohibit four ubiquitous food additives, including Red No. 3, from manufacture, sale, or distribution. A more recent legislation passed in California aims to ban six of the nine FDA-approved artificial color additives from school food and drinks by 2027, although Red No. 3 was not amongst these.
In the wake of California’s decisions, several states followed suit, proposing their individual bills concerning food additive usage. Most notable among these are Illinois and New York, both looking to restrict the use of synthetic additives including Red No. 3.
In April, the Illinois State Senate took a crucial step forward by passing a bill that aims to ban Red No. 3 along with three other chemical additives. It’s currently pending approval in the state House. New York also put forward a similar proposition in February, targeting a ban on Red No. 3 in all its food and beverages.
Over the past ten years, a series of bills concerning Red No. 3 and other similar food dyes have been introduced across multiple states. These include Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Washington, and West Virginia – as reported by the Environmental Working Group, a non-profit organization.
However, these regulatory measures and restrictions have not been well received by all. Notably, they face staunch criticism from food manufacturers and industry groups who argue against such limitations.
In conclusion, the presence, and potential banning, of Red No. 3 in our food has sparked debates among lawmakers, activists, and industry stakeholders. As those involved await the FDA’s decision on the matter, the controversy serves as a reminder of the constant tug-of-war between commercial interests and public health concerns.