What Red Dye No. 3’s FDA ban means for food and beverages

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced today a comprehensive ban on a common food colouring. While food bans are often controversial – find us a cultured foodie who isn’t complaining reasons why haggis is illegalor clotted cream being banned from supermarket shelves – the only brouhaha regarding the ban on red dye no. 3 is why it took the regulator so long to cancel it. Red dye no. 3 has long been associated with possible carcinogenic effects in humans and animals when ingested. Meanwhile, several food manufacturers have already voluntarily phased out the products in the past few years. The state of California even made it illegal back in 2023.

What does this mean for your favorite scarlet foods and drinks? Well, manufacturers who haven’t already banned the dye may soon change formulas. The FDA has determined that red no. 3 must be out of consumer goods and beverages no later than January 15, 2027, and out of medicine by the same date in 2028. The dye is typically used to achieve a cherry red color, which can be replicated by substituting an alternative color, red dye no. 40. However, even the substitute is coming under fire for possibly being associated with a wide range of health risks (including behavioral problems and another possible cancer-causing link), leading to a larger conversation about the problems with artificial colors in food.

Read more: 14 1990s Discontinued Snacks You Probably Forgot Existed

Shall red dye no. 3 replaced?

When you look around your kitchen for hazards, you probably think about things like that fact putting metal in the microwave is bad. You probably don’t stare at a box of granulated sugar and think that it could possibly lead to a tumor. However, scientists have been aware since 1990 that red dye no. 3 caused cancer in experimental animals, the year the FDA banned the dye in topical drugs and cosmetics. That should have compelled the FDA to act, but it is only 35 years later that a ban was passed. Also consider that red dye no. 40, a common substitute for no. 3, is also prohibited in California. The Cleveland Clinic notes that red dye no. 40 is associated with hyperactivity in children, allergic reactions and may contain benzene, another known carcinogen.

The European Union has banned a number of dyes and requires packaging to disclose the use of even those that are still legal. Why hasn’t the US done the same? “(F)ommodity companies have lost sight of their primary mission of providing food we want to thrive and are focusing solely on their profits instead,” said Dr. Jerold Mande, an adjunct professor of nutrition at Harvard University. CNN. Banning cheap artificial dyes forces companies to seek natural alternatives, which is an expensive process. Too many heads forbid red dye no. 3 is a good step, but it should arguably have happened much earlier and been accompanied by other, more far-reaching restrictions.

Read original article on Foodie.