{"id":3471,"date":"2023-10-31T02:22:14","date_gmt":"2023-10-30T20:52:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/adultserviceau.com.au\/blog\/will-californias-ban-on-red-dye-no-3-prompt-more-action\/"},"modified":"2023-10-31T02:22:14","modified_gmt":"2023-10-30T20:52:14","slug":"will-californias-ban-on-red-dye-no-3-prompt-more-action","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/adultserviceau.com.au\/blog\/will-californias-ban-on-red-dye-no-3-prompt-more-action\/","title":{"rendered":"Will California’s Ban on Red Dye No. 3 Prompt More Action?"},"content":{"rendered":"

[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n

\n
\n

Oct. 27, 2023 — California Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel admits it. The issue wasn\u2019t on his radar when a coalition of advocates approached him to talk about the need to remove dangerous additives from the food supply.<\/span><\/p>\n

Gabriel, a Democrat from the San Fernando Valley, also admits he hasn\u2019t always been the healthiest eater, but now, as the father of three young sons, \u201cyou start to think about these things. You want to do right by your kids.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cI will confess, at first I was a little bit skeptical,\u201d he said. As he looked over the data, he was astonished. \u201cIt seems crazy to me that there were these chemicals that were banned not only in the 27 nations of the European Union but really in dozens of countries around the world, based on strong scientific evidence they are linked with significant health harms.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

As he walked others in the Assembly through the science, he picked up bipartisan support for the bill he and his colleagues introduced. On Oct. 7, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the California Food Safety Act, making California the first state to prohibit the manufacture, sale, or distribution of any food product containing Red Dye No. 3 as well as three other chemicals: potassium bromate, brominated vegetable oil, and propyl paraben.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/section>\n

\n

It takes effect in 2027.<\/span><\/p>\n

California, New York, FDA?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Now, New York has proposed similar legislation,\u00a0<\/span>Senate Bill S6055A<\/span><\/a> and\u00a0<\/span>Assembly Bill A6424,<\/span><\/a> currently in early stages. Advocates for phasing out Red Dye No. 3 and other harmful additives hope these state-based developments will spur the FDA to finally take similar action and respond to a petition requesting the ban of Red Dye No. 3.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

It\u2019s been just over a year since the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Environmental Working Group, and 22 other organizations filed that\u00a0<\/span>petition<\/span><\/a> with the FDA, asking the agency to ban Red Dye No. 3 in foods and supplements.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cWe anticipate this new law [in California] will have national impacts,\u201d said Thomas Galligan, PhD, principal scientist for food additives and supplements for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a nonprofit advocacy group that seeks to make foods healthier. \u201cIt certainly mounts more pressure on the FDA for them to respond [to the 2022 petition].\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

The FDA did acknowledge receipt of the petition, which the agency filed on Nov. 15, Galligan said, but he said they missed the 180-day deadline \u2013 May 14, 2023 — to respond.<\/span><\/p>\n

The FDA has not responded to requests for comment about when the agency would act on the petition or about why it has taken so long.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, some companies have taken the initiative, removing Red Dye No. 3 from products even before the legal deadline or setting a deadline for when it will be removed. The maker of Peeps, the marshmallow treat favored at Easter, said it will no longer use the dye after Easter 2024. But one industry group balks at the new law, contending that it will create confusion and said waiting on the FDA decision would be best.<\/span><\/p>\n

Chronology of Concern<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Concerns about the health effects of Red Dye No. 3 can be traced to the 1990s, when research found that it causes thyroid cancer in rats and the FDA agreed the evidence was robust enough to \u201cfirmly establish\u201d the link between the dye and thyroid cancer in rats.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<\/section>\n

\n

That finding alone obliges the FDA to act, Galligan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest said, citing what\u2019s known as the\u00a0<\/span>Delaney Clause.<\/span><\/a> Incorporated into the federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act by the Food Additives Amendment of 1958, the clause requires the FDA to ban any food additives found to cause or induce cancer in either animals or people.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cThe FDA acknowledged in 1990 that Red Dye No. 3 causes cancer in animals,\u201d Galligan said. \u201cBy our assessment of the evidence there have not been further studies since the 1990 one to refute the FDA\u2019s prior conclusion.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

The FDA banned Red Dye No. 3 in cosmetics and externally applied drugs, but not in foods and supplements. Since the 1990 investigations, much other research has linked the additive with health issues:<\/span><\/p>\n