FDA Bans Food Dye 3 From Food, Drinks, and Ingested Drugs.

On Wednesday, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced the prohibition of red dye No. 3 in food, beverages, and medications for consumption.

This decision was based on almost thirty years of scientific evidence connecting the dye to cancer in animals. Red dye No. 3, a synthetic compound generated from petroleum and chemically designated as erythrosine, is commonly employed to provide a vivid cherry-red hue to products and beverages.

The decision was taken in reaction to a petition submitted by advocacy organizations, including the Centre for Science in the Public Interest and the Environmental Working Group. The petition cited research linking color to elevated cancer risk.

This ruling follows the prohibition of the dye in California in October 2023. Manufacturers utilizing red No. 3 in the food and drug sectors must reformulate their products by January 15, 2027, and January 18, 2028, respectively, to comply with the new regulations.

Imported FDA products must also adhere to the new regulations.

Dr. Jerold Mande, an adjunct professor of nutrition at Harvard University, commended the move as a long-overdue advancement.

He stated, “The FDA’s action today is long overdue, represents a minor advancement, and ideally indicates a revitalized commitment by the FDA to fulfill its responsibilities despite the numerous obstacles posed by the food industry.”

Ken Cook, a cofounder of the Environmental Working Group, characterized the limitation as a “monumental victory” for consumer health.

“This historic decision would not be celebrated today without the unwavering leadership of public health advocates such as Michael Jacobson and others who championed this cause for consumers decades ago,” Cook remarked in his statement.

Candy, food, and beverages are among the most prevalent products using red dye No. 3. Several prominent companies, notably Ferrara, the manufacturer of Brach’s chocolates, have commenced the process of discontinuing the use of the color. The corporation’s statistics indicate that the component remains in less than 10 percent of Ferrara’s products.

The dye is linked to numerous health problems, including cancer in animals. It was determined to be carcinogenic in laboratory rats, resulting in the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prohibiting its usage in cosmetics and topical therapies in 1990. Nonetheless, the FDA persisted in permitting its utilization in food.

Experts assert that the Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act necessitates a prohibition if a substance induces cancer in animals or humans.

Nevertheless, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asserted that testing has not demonstrated any direct risks to human health associated with the dye in food.

Despite numerous reevaluations, this FDA still exists.

The ruling signifies a transition towards enhanced consumer safety, aligning regulations in the United States more closely with those of the European Union, which banned the use of red dye No. 3 in 1994.

Worried about the potential behavioral effects of food dyes on children, several jurisdictions, including California, have enacted measures to ban the use of certain food colorings.

Dr. Thomas Galligan, the chief scientist at the Centre for Science in the Public Interest, announced the significant ban. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) must, however, tackle overarching issues within the food safety regulatory framework to avert analogous delays in the future, he underscored.

With the implementation of the FDA’s ban, manufacturers will be obligated to explore alternative coloring chemicals. Red dye No. 40 is considered less toxic, yet worries regarding its safety persist.

The current debate reflects widespread worries regarding food chemicals and their potential health repercussions.

It is advisable for consumers who wish to avoid red dye No. 3 to examine ingredient labels for the terms “red 3” or “FD&C Red #3.” The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has mandated that manufacturers disclose the dye on their product labels, enabling consumers to avoid use until the prohibition is fully enacted.

The ban is a victory for consumer health advocates, although it also highlights the persistent contradictions between public health concerns and the practices of the food industry.

SOURCE: TET