Quick Study Analysis: Red Dye #3 (Erythrosine)
tl;dr: The FDA belatedly bans this common food coloring: The FDA loses either way you understand this ruling.
So you may have heard that Robert Kennedy Jr. is likely going to be Secretary of Health and Human Services, the part of the executive branch that contains, among others, the FDA, CDC, CMS, NIH, and on and on.
One of Kennedy’s pet peeves has been food dyes.
“‘The first thing I’d do isn’t going to cost you anything because I’m just gonna tell the cereal companies, take all the dyes out of their food,’ Kennedy said during an October appearance on ‘Fox & Friends.’”
Surprisingly, with RFK Jr. around the corner, the FDA just announced that it has banned red dye #3 (RD3) in food and ingested drugs.
From one point of view, this is a no-brainer. It’s U.S. law (the Delaney Clause) that any food additive that causes cancer in animals should be banned by the FDA.
“…the Secretary of the Food and Drug Administration shall not approve for use in food any chemical additive found to induce cancer in man, or, after tests, found to induce cancer in animals.”
Now, one can argue whether or not that is the appropriate standard. It does have some merit. But regardless, the FDA found, in 1990, that RD3 does indeed cause cancer in animals, and thus banned it from being used “in externally applied drugs and externally applied cosmetics” (Lurie, 2022).
RD3 had already been approved for use in foods and ingested drugs, so this clearly presented an issue for the FDA.
“As such, FDA limited their response to those [topical] uses, but stated it would ‘take steps’ to ban the use of FD&C Red No. 3 in food and ingested drugs, and that ‘[b]ecause large amounts of the color have been shown to cause cancer in rats, FDA...plans to end the remaining uses’ of FD&C Red No. 3.” (Lurie, 2022)
(Lurie, 2022) notes that as the cancer tests were of the ingested RD3:
“In fact, the tests that FDA relied upon to conclude that FD&C Red No. 3 caused cancer were feeding studies, and so are particularly relevant to ingested uses of FD&C Red No. 3.”
It would seem particularly apt for the FDA to thus ban its consumption.
The FDA did nothing.
Thirty-two years later, a bunch of non-profits filed a petition (Lurie, 2022) to prod the FDA to follow the law.
A year later, 2023 the FDA filed this petition for comment.
“The Food and Drug Administration (FDA or we) is announcing that we have filed a petition, submitted by Center for Science in the Public Interest, et al., proposing that FDA repeal the color additive regulations providing for the use of FD&C Red No. 3 in foods (including dietary supplements) and in ingested drugs.” (Roth, 2023)
The FDA has up to 180 days after this was filed to issue the regulation.
They received over 30,000 comments, and I’d like to go through them. (Just kidding.)
They finally published the repeal of the regulation allowing RD3 yesterday, long after their statutory deadline.
So having blown through all the deadlines for this, it seems like they have finally acted in fear of RFK Jr. becoming their boss.
Either way, this is pathetic. Knowing RD3 was harmful, and that they were obligated under law to ban it, they did nothing; and then, faced with the fury of the new boss, the lickspittles finally pushed it over the finish line.
I’m not familiar with the science behind ingesting RD3, but this certainly falls under the heading of “why would you eat this”? I’ve never seen any claim of a benefit other than in marketing, and so I’m not going to bother trying to determine if the science behind banning this chemical is appropriate, but I’ll quote the FDA:
“Specifically, the petitioners state that experimental data show that FD&C Red No. 3 induces cancer when fed to rats and that FDA concluded such in 1990. The petitioners also state that subsequent studies and reviews have reinforced FDA's conclusion. The petitioners cite, as evidence, data and information from the National Toxicology Program, the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives, and the European Commission's Scientific Committee for Food (which was later replaced by the European Food Safety Authority). The petitioners also state that there is widespread exposure to U.S. consumers, particularly children, and that very young children have the highest exposures to the color additive.”
Yet another example of how the FDA fails to protect us, or even to do their jobs. Kennedy needs a big axe.
References
Lurie, P., Jensen, J., & Galligan, T. M. (2022, October 24). Filing of Color Additive Petition from Center for Science in the Public Interest, et al.; Request to Revoke Color Additive Listing for Use of FD&C Red No. 3 in Food and Ingested Drugs. Center for Science in the Public Interest. https://www.regulations.gov/docket/FDA-2023-N-0437
Roth, L. (2023, February 17). Filing of Color Additive Petition From Center for Science in the Public Interest, et al.; Request To Revoke Color Additive Listing for Use of FD&C Red No. 3 in Food and Ingested Drugs. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/02/17/2023-03391/filing-of-color-additive-petition-from-center-for-science-in-the-public-interest-et-al-request-to
Rosiglitazone is an hypoglycemic drug appoved by the FDA for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and ten years later it was shown that it produces an increase in heart attacks and in Europe it was banned by the Health Authorities. But in the USA the company was sued by 13.000 patients and their families. And the FDA made a new study that " demonstrated " the drug was safe and authorized to be marketed in the USA . And guess who financed the "study " . The FDA has also approved other drugs that have followed the same way. There's an obvious need in the Drug Companies to sell drugs and making the larger profit no matter what happens to the people, to the sick people. Like the song of the movie Easy Rider called The Pusher the guy who sell you illegal drugs and the lyrics say : but the pusher don't care if you live or if you died.
I'm throwing out my Red Vines....!