Why We Should Embrace Europe’s Approach to Banning Toxic Dyes in Our Foods: Insights from Linda Boyle

FDA’s Move to Eliminate Harmful Food Dyes

On April 22, 2025, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy and FDA Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary made a significant announcement: they’ll be phasing out eight harmful synthetic dyes from our food. These dyes, found in popular snacks like Pop-Tarts, hot dogs, and Mountain Dew, have raised health concerns for years.

The FDA is also introducing four natural color alternatives, aiming to transition away from these synthetic options quickly. For instance, Red No. 3, which has already been linked to potential cancer risks, is scheduled for removal by 2027-2028. This dye was banned in cosmetics nearly 35 years ago due to its health risks, raising questions about why it remained in our food supply for so long.

Dr. Makary highlighted studies, including one from The Lancet, that linked synthetic dyes to a range of health issues like hyperactivity, obesity, and allergies. California has taken a proactive approach as well; last year, it banned six synthetic dyes from public school lunches, citing evidence of their negative impact on children’s behavior.

Interestingly, many of these synthetic dyes are banned in the European Union. The EU operates under the “precautionary principle,” requiring manufacturers to prove safety before approval. In contrast, the US follows the GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) principle, which can allow additives without thorough safety reviews.

A concerning loophole exists where food companies can create their own panels to certify additives, often without independent FDA oversight. This has led to the widespread use of potentially harmful ingredients in the US market. For example, a recent Forbes article detailed various additives such as Potassium Bromate and Titanium Dioxide, both banned in Europe but still found in US foods.

According to the Environmental Working Group, a staggering 99% of new food chemicals approved between 2000 and 2021 went through the GRAS process, often endorsed by panels financed by the same companies advocating for their use. This creates a significant conflict of interest in food safety assessments.

In 2010, the European Union began reviewing food chemicals systematically to ensure their safety. Meanwhile, the US still relies heavily on self-certifications by food companies. The stark contrast raises the question: Shouldn’t we adopt the EU’s approach, especially given the potential risks to our health and the well-being of our children?

The influence of the food industry on legislation cannot be ignored. Protecting our health should take precedence over corporate interests. As we navigate these changes, it’s essential to remain vigilant about the safety of our food supply and advocate for continued improvements.

Linda Boyle, RN, MSN, DM, has a strong background in healthcare, having served in various leadership roles including the chief nurse for the 3rd Medical Group at JBER and director of the Alaska VA Healthcare System. She is actively involved in initiatives focusing on personal freedom and health advocacy.

Source link

Alaska,cancer,FDA,food dyes,News,Ro bert F. Kennedy Jr.,toxins