Artificial food dyes are ubiquitous in many candies and fruit-flavored snacks found in mainstream grocery stores across America. These additives are listed in thousands of branded products, from Fruit Loops and Trix Cereal to Gatorade and Skittles. They may soon be prohibited in public schools in California.

Due to emerging scientific research suggesting a possible connection between food dyes and hyperactivity in children, several states are introducing legislation to regulate these additives.

A pioneering law that would prohibit the serving of foods containing certain artificial dyes in schools was approved by California’s state legislature last month. Known as AB 2316 or the California School Food Safety Act, this legislation seeks to restrict six artificial food colorings, specifically Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6.

The bill is currently awaiting the approval of California Governor Gavin Newsom; he has until Monday to decide whether to sign it into law, as stated by his office. Brandon Richards, the governor’s deputy director for rapid response, told YSL News via email that the bill “will be evaluated on its merits.”

Furthermore, multiple states are pursuing similar legislative actions. For example, a bill proposed in Pennsylvania’s legislature in March aims to categorize these six additives as “poisonous and deleterious substances.”

“I spend so much time checking labels at the grocery store—it’s frustrating,” said Pennsylvania State Rep. Natalie Mihalek, who sponsored the bill, in an interview with YSL News.

Are food dyes a cause of ADHD?

The initiative in California was based on a 2021 report by the state’s Environmental Protection Agency, which indicated a connection between the consumption of these dyes and issues like “hyperactivity and other neurobehavioral problems.”

“There is significant evidence suggesting a link between the intake of these additives and behavioral changes, particularly in children who are already sensitive, such as those diagnosed with ADHD,” stated Asa Bradman, a professor at the University of California, Merced, who contributed to the state review. “Exposure to these dyes appears to worsen their symptoms.”

Consumption of artificial dyes among American children has risen dramatically; it has increased more than fivefold since 1955, with over 17 million pounds of these dyes used in 2015, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, an advocacy group. Critics of food dyes cite a parallel rise in ADHD diagnoses—from 6.1% in 1997 to 10.2% a decade later, according to some studies.

According to Bradman, although some dye-containing foods, like ice cream or candy, aren’t consumed frequently, these additives are now found in everyday products like juice and sodas that children consume regularly.

“The truth is these additives offer no nutritional value or other benefits; they are purely for visual appeal,” Bradman pointed out.

The FDA stated in a report to YSL News that they have “reviewed the research regarding the impact of color additives on children’s behavior, including the literature review referenced by the Bill. The collective scientific evidence shows that most children experience no negative effects from consuming color additives, although some children may be sensitive to them.”

While scientists have not definitively established a direct correlation, according to Bradman and the report, it is evident that certain children are likely more affected by these dyes than others.

Though further studies are needed for a clearer conclusion, “current scientific findings indicate that there probably is some type of connection or effect,” commented Sarah Karalunas, an associate professor in psychological sciences at Purdue University.

“The more robust the study, the larger the observed effect,” but even in well-conducted studies, the effect tends to be “marginal,” she added.

Karalunas highlighted that many foods containing these dyes also include various other additives, making it challenging to determine the specific negative health impacts attributable solely to the dyes themselves.

Bradman concurred, noting that products high in food dyes are generally classified as “junk food,” which often also have elevated levels of refined sugars, fats, and other additives.

State legislators targeting a dye banned in cosmetics

Some upcoming legislation specifically targets Red 3. According to Karalunas, red dyes, including Red 40, display a “stronger” association with hyperactivity in the existing scientific literature.

Red 3 has also raised concerns related to cancer in some animal studies. Although the FDA prohibited its use in cosmetic products in 1990 due to these concerns, it remains permitted in food items.

Since then, advocates have initiated several campaigns aimed at regulating a specific chemical. For example, last year, the research organization Consumer Reports urged the manufacturer of Peeps candies to discontinue using a certain dye and subsequently started a petition when no action was taken.

California was the pioneer in banning this chemical. In the previous year, the state passed a law known as the “Skittles ban,” which allows manufacturers until 2027 to eliminate Red 3 from their formulations.

Mihalek, whose proposed legislation addresses Red 3 and other chemicals, described regulating this substance as “low-hanging fruit.”

“We’re discussing the process of creating something a vibrant red while potentially risking cancer along with a range of additional health hazards,” she stated. “It just doesn’t add up.”

More lawmakers across various states are introducing comparable legislation. Recently, the Illinois State Senate moved forward with a bill intending to ban Red 3 alongside three other chemical additives, and it is now heading to the state House for review.

According to Illinois State Sen. Steve McClure, who spoke to the Senate, “The FDA prohibits its use in cosmetics, yet children consume it in candy.”

Illinois State Sen. Willie Preston, the bill’s sponsor, pointed out that lawmakers have a “limited timeframe” to get the legislation through before the year ends.

If they succeed, the bill might be passed before Thanksgiving. Otherwise, he stated, “I plan to reintroduce this bill and ensure the food supply in Illinois is safeguarded.”

Attempts to regulate these chemicals have faced backlash from food manufacturers and industry organizations, who claim these moves lack a scientific basis.

The National Confectioners’ Association issued a statement regarding the Illinois bill, arguing, “It’s about time we stop pretending that Illinois legislators possess the scientific knowledge required to make these crucial regulatory decisions. Overriding the FDA’s authority simply leads to a confusing mix of inconsistent regulations that hike food prices, create confusion around food safety, and diminish consumer trust.” The association has not responded to YSL News’s inquiries for comments.

Lawmakers promise to reintroduce bills next year

Over the past ten years, there have been legislative efforts targeting Red 3 and six food dyes identified in California’s recent bill in states such as Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Washington, and West Virginia, as reported by the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit organization.

Some lawmakers remain determined to pursue these initiatives, regardless of whether this year’s legislative session concludes without success.

With only a few months left in Pennsylvania’s legislative session, Mihalek is unlikely to see her legislation passed this year. However, if she is re-elected in November, she intends to reintroduce it next year.

“Above all, this bill aims to raise awareness,” she emphasized.

She criticized the current regulatory framework, stating it places the burden on consumers to avoid products containing ingredients with long-standing evidence of causing cancer and behavioral issues.

At least one proposal for a nationwide ban is already in play in Congress. In June, U.S. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna from Florida’s 13th congressional district presented the “Do or Dye Act,” which would classify any foods with Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, and “substantially similar” additives as “unsafe.”

“It was clear that these chemicals were already banned in other countries due to known health dangers,” she shared with YSL News. If the bill is approved, she anticipates that manufacturers “will have no choice but to explore alternatives or just produce healthier options by omitting these additives.”

This legislation is particularly significant to Luna, who aims to incorporate similar amendments in the upcoming farm bill, which is scheduled to be voted on by the end of the month.

‘A superficial method to enhance food appeal’

Thomas Galligan, a principal scientist specializing in food additives and supplements at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, believes that California’s initiative will encourage other states to follow suit, although many advocates stress the need for federal regulation.

The center had previously submitted a petition to the FDA in 2008, seeking a ban on eight approved food dyes, demanding that manufacturers include warning labels on products with these chemicals and insisting on new testing. Although a meeting was held in 2011 to discuss the matter, the FDA concluded that there wasn’t enough evidence to substantiate the claims, recommending further investigation.

Federal authorities have occasionally mandated recalls of products lacking proper declarations of dyes. Recently, two beverage products were recalled due to undeclared quantities of Yellow 5 and Red 40.

Galligan hopes that the California bill will compel manufacturers to substitute artificial color additives with natural alternatives in products available throughout the U.S. “It’s more difficult for them to create a product specific to California than to adjust their entire production process,” he noted.

Regulatory adjustments in Europe had a similar impact years back. Following two UK studies in 2004 and 2007 that echoed findings from the California review, the European Union implemented stricter regulations on these chemicals, which included requiring labeled warnings for certain dyes in foods. Consequently, several food companies began using natural color alternatives. For instance, Nestle switched to using annatto, derived from the seeds of the achiote tree, to color Butterfingers sold in Europe, as reported by the government of the Netherlands.

“The food sector evidently viewed these dyes as effective marketing instruments, which is exactly what they are,” Galligan explained. “At their core, they serve merely as a cosmetic enhancement to make food visually attractive, encouraging us to spend our money on them.”

The FDA completed its latest evaluation of the six chemicals highlighted in California’s recent legislation in 2016, as stated in a communication to YSL News. Following this, the FDA plans to convene a public meeting to reassess the procedures involved in evaluating chemicals present in food products after they enter the market.

Galligan suggests that recent state-level legislation, including California’s, might have prompted the scheduled meeting.

“In a sense, state actions appear to be motivating both the industry and the FDA to take steps where they previously had not,” he concluded. “We find ourselves in a situation where evidence of harm becomes apparent only after the chemicals have received approval. decades go by without meaningful action.”