After Hours: Dye Hard: Artificial Food Dye Links to Cancer, ADD, and More

Summary

Full Measure After Hours: Dye Hard – Artificial Food Dye Links to Cancer, ADD, and More

Host: Sharyl Attkisson
Guest: Sarah Sorcher, Center for Science in the Public Interest
Release Date: January 2, 2025

---

Introduction

In this episode of Full Measure After Hours, host Sharyl Attkisson delves into the contentious issue of artificial food dyes and their potential links to serious health concerns such as cancer and Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD). The discussion features Sarah Sorcher from the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a prominent consumer advocacy organization dedicated to promoting safer food systems.

Health Risks of Artificial Food Dyes

Sarah Sorcher outlines the significant health risks associated with synthetic food dyes. She emphasizes their connection to neurobehavioral issues in children, notably symptoms resembling Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Sorcher explains:

"Food dyes have been tied to neurobehavioral risks in certain children, like ADD. We're talking about ADHD-like symptoms. So inattention, restlessness, difficulty concentrating, and this can cause issues in the classroom and for kids at home."
[01:51]

Moreover, Sorcher highlights cancer risks linked to specific dyes. Red No. 3, in particular, has been associated with cancer in animal studies conducted in the 1980s. Despite evidence, the FDA has not banned Red No. 3 for use in food:

"Red 3 was associated with cancer in animal studies. There's very clear evidence tying Red 3 to cancer risks in animals... but FDA never took action on Red 3 in foods."
[02:14]

Regulatory Challenges and FDA Response

A significant portion of the discussion focuses on the FDA's role and perceived inaction regarding the regulation of artificial food dyes. Sorcher criticizes the FDA for being under-resourced and susceptible to industry influence, leading to insufficient oversight:

"The FDA ... has been asleep at the wheel when it comes to additive safety... they're vulnerable to capture from the food industry."
[02:57]

She further explains the FDA's reliance on the "de minimis" exception, which allows the continued use of additives deemed not harmful at low exposure levels. However, Sorcher contends that cumulative exposures from various sources can still pose significant health risks:

"The FDA is required by law to remove food additives that are known to cause cancer... but they feel that the level of exposure isn't high enough to, to trigger action."
[03:45]

State-Level Actions

In response to federal inaction, some states have begun taking matters into their own hands. California is at the forefront, considering legislation to remove synthetic dyes and titanium dioxide from school meals. Sorcher anticipates positive outcomes from such measures:

"The state of California is currently considering a bill to take synthetic dyes and titanium dioxide out of school meals... this takes it one step further in terms of protecting children."
[09:19]

She notes that California's recent ban on Red No. 3 and other harmful additives, effective in 2027, sets a precedent for stricter state regulations.

Common Foods Containing Controversial Dyes

Addressing consumer concerns, Sorcher provides examples of commonly consumed products that contain questionable dyes. While specific brands like Campbell's Soup and Kraft Cheddar Fat Free Shredded Cheese have been identified, the conversation underscores the prevalence of these additives in various food categories:

"Campbell's Soup uses titanium dioxide... Kraft Cheddar Fat Free Shredded Cheese uses titanium dioxide. ... Great Value Country Sausage Gravy and Lunchables Uploaded Meal Kit with Turkey, Ham and American Sub Sandwich has titanium dioxide."
[12:42 – 13:24]

Advice for Consumers

Recognizing the difficulty consumers face in navigating food labels, Sorcher advises using resources like CSPI's "Chemical Cuisine" website, which rates the safety of different food additives. She emphasizes the complexity of identifying harmful substances based solely on ingredient names:

"It's hard to go just by the name alone because a chemically sounding name might not indicate a safety risk... much easier to use resources that break down the safety of each additive."
[14:11 – 15:28]

Personal Stories and Impact

Sorcher shares compelling anecdotes from families who have observed significant behavioral improvements in their children after eliminating synthetic dyes from their diets. These personal stories underscore the real-world impact of artificial food additives on children's health and development:

"Hearing some of the stories from individual families... how very clear it is that they'll have a story where they were having issues in a child and they pulled out the dyes. The issue's resolved."
[15:40]

Conclusions and Takeaways

The episode concludes with Sorcher urging the need for stronger federal regulation to protect consumers from harmful food additives. She advocates for the FDA to take decisive action based on scientific evidence rather than deferring to industry concerns:

"We need a strong science-based federal regulator to be stepping up and actually taking action to remove some of these dyes and give consumers the information they need."
[16:17]

---

Final Thoughts

Full Measure After Hours provides an in-depth examination of the risks associated with artificial food dyes, the regulatory shortcomings of the FDA, and the proactive measures some states are taking to safeguard public health. Through expert insights and real-life stories, the episode highlights the urgent need for comprehensive policies to ensure the safety of the nation's food supply.

---

Note: For a visual list of common foods containing controversial dyes and additional resources, listeners are encouraged to visit the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s website.

Transcript

[Interviewer]

Foreign.

[Cheryl Akison]

Hi, everybody. Cheryl Akison here. Welcome to another edition of Full Measure. After Hours today, die hard artificial food dye links to cancer, ADD and more Artificial dyes and other chemical additives in our food could be on the chopping block when the new Trump administration begins its second term, partly on the promise to make America healthy again. But some states have already been moving to ban various chemicals. And that's the topic of my cover story on full measure Sunday, December 15th. In today's podcast, we will hear some details from Sarah Sorcher of the consumer group center for Science in the Public Interest. It's one of two dozen consumer groups that two years ago petitioned the FDA to to ban red dye number three.

[Interviewer]

Can you briefly explain in a paragraph what center for Science in the Public Interest is and does?

[Sarah Sorcher]

We are your food and health watchdog. We're a consumer advocacy organization. We were founded in 1970, and we have a dual mission of educating consumers and advocating for a safer food system.

[Interviewer]

Do they take any industry money?

[Sarah Sorcher]

We are funded solely through foundations and through individual supporters. We do not take government grants and we do not take funding from the food industry.

[Interviewer]

We're here in part to talk today about food dyes. Without asking you to do an extensive history, can you just briefly hit on a few bullet points as to when we started to understand when there came to be some controversy about what food dyes might do?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yeah, food dyes have been tied to neurobehavioral risks in certain children, like add. We're talking about adhd, like symptoms. So inattention, restlessness, difficulty concentrating, and this can cause issues in the classroom and for kids at home.

[Interviewer]

Have there also been concerns about cancer?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Some of the synthetic food dyes have been associated with cancer risks. Red 3 was tied to cancer through Red 3 was associated with cancer in animal studies. There's very clear evidence tying Red 3 to cancer risks in animals. And those studies were conducted in the 1980s. In 1990, the Food and Drug Administration actually acted on those studies to ban Red 3 from cosmetics. So. So currently you can't go to the store and buy lipstick with Red 3 in it, but FDA never took action on Red 3 in foods. So you can still go to the store and purchase Halloween candy or Easter candy that contains Red three.

[Interviewer]

How can that be? Not okay to put on your face but okay to eat?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yeah. The FDA Food Program is the agency that's supposed to be serving as a watchdog on our food system. They're the watchdog. They're the gatekeeper. But for the last several Decades at least, they've been asleep at the wheel when it comes to additive safety. This agency is under resourced. They are disorganized and they are vulnerable to capture from the food industry. And as a result, there's a number of food additives, including Red 3, that have very clear health risks, including risk of cancer, where FDA has allowed them to remain on the market even knowing the clear risks.

[Interviewer]

What would be the FDA's answer to that question? And we will ask, but would they say there's just not enough evidence to pull it from food?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yes. So the FDA is required by law to remove food additives that are known to cause cancer in human or animal studies. But FDA over the years has often failed to act because they feel that the level of exposure isn't high enough to, to trigger action. So for many years they allowed food additives to be approved based on this so called de minimis exception. The courts have explained that that is illegal. It's not compliant with their statute. But FDA continues to fail to take action when we have dyes that have very clear documented risks and they aren't widespread enough to warrant, I guess, in the FDA's view, taking action on them.

[Interviewer]

Correct me where I'm wrong here, but I thought I read some history about food dyes and that quite a few of them have either been pulled from the market here or elsewhere. There aren't that many remaining because the others, for the same reasons, have been found to be connected with various health risks. And we're to think that the few left may not cause those health risks?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Well, there are a few dyes that have been pulled from the market in the United States. There's a violet food coloring that was banned many decades ago. A number of other dyes are no longer in use in the European Union because the EU requires a warning on synthetic food dyes that cause neurobehavioral risks in children. I'm sorry, that cause neurobehavioral effects in children. And after the EU put that warning in place, most food companies chose to reformulate rather than have that warning on their products. And they were able to come up with solutions that allowed them to sell bright, colorful, attractive foods with safer dyes.

[Interviewer]

What is it, do we know about food dyes that can potentially cause cancer or other brain effects in kids and other people?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yeah. So there have been a number of studies on synthetic food dyes and neurobehavioral risks in children. The California Environmental Protection Agency, it's called the Office of Health Hazard Environmental Assessment. OEHA did a very detailed review of the safety of synthetic food dyes and determined that synthetic dyes are associated with neurobehavioral effects in some children. That was based on both animal trials and human data, and the agency expressed concern that this could impact their social and academic success. The FDA has also conducted proceedings, scientific proceedings, on food dyes, and hasn't come to as strong a conclusion on their safety. But the state of California certainly has found strong assurance that they have these effects. For some of the dyes, like Red 3, there is also additional cancer risk. And then titanium dioxide is a food coloring. It's technically not a dye that has come under scrutiny in recent years because it was banned in the European Union due to a concern that it contains nanoparticles that can build up in the body and cause damage to DNA.

[Interviewer]

Are there any food dyes that you know of that are not. Are there any artificial food dyes that you know of that are not associated with alleged risk?

[Sarah Sorcher]

I'm going to have to defer to our chief scientist on that. I know that the EU warning only applies to certain dyes. Some of the blue synthetic dyes aren't covered. And so you'll still find those dyes in the eu, but he will be able to assess whether, you know, what's the validity behind that exclusion.

[Interviewer]

Now, some years ago, I thought I read or heard that the United States, that food companies here were going to pull some of these controversial dyes out of their food. The stuff that makes Cheetos very orange and Doritos orange, for example. But I don't think that's happened.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yes, almost a decade ago, a number of companies made public commitments to remove dyes from their foods voluntarily out of concern that this is really what consumers were looking for. That consumers didn't want to eat foods with synthetic dyes, synthetic dyes, because of the behavioral risks and the cancer risks. And those commitments were made very publicly, but then were made on a timeline that would require the company to then follow up and implement them. And many, many companies have not met their voluntary commitments. And we're still seeing a lot of synthetic dyes in foods, even where the company has committed to remove.

[Interviewer]

You mentioned a de minimis argument that the FDA may make that says the exposure that an individual might get isn't enough to cause concern. One issue with that is there are many, probably cumulative exposures that we get in our food and environment every day. It's not just that one thing. So could this not add to a child or a person's Burden and exposures, even if that alone is not the thing necessarily causing the entire problem.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yes. You know, when the, the agency has data on the overall consumption across the food supply of these synthetic dyes and you could easily see someone who, because of the exposure they're getting in their daily life is getting, you know, extremely high dose of synthetic dye. And we also know that some kids are more sensitive than others to these risks. And so we do see examples of kids who have really dealt with some very serious behavioral struggles that can be resolved by removing synthetic DY from their diets. And that's why it's so important that parents be armed with this information so that they can make that choice for their own kids.

[Interviewer]

What do you think should happen?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Well, the state of California is currently considering a bill to take synthetic dyes and titanium dioxide out of school meals. And this is a really simple common sense step that policymakers can take because we know that behavioral effects can impact kids performance in school. And we know that kids in school are a captive audience so the child doesn't get to decide what gets put on their plate in school. That's a decision the school district is making. And so what these bills do is they give Californians or any state really a chance to make a decision about what they're going to be buying with this taxpayer funded program. And they could easily say we don't want to be spending money on foods that are going to impair kids ability to perform in school and potentially put them at risk of cancer and other negative health effects.

[Interviewer]

Is that going to go into play, you think, or go into effect?

[Sarah Sorcher]

I think this bill has a very strong chance of passing. We know that the state of California recently acted to ban for harmful food additives from the entire food supply within the state, not just school foods. One of those was Red three. In fact, that ban is going to go into effect in 2027. So we might still see some RED3 and other additives on the market that have been banned in California. But I think this takes it one step further in terms of protecting children. And we know that a lot of companies have portfolios of foods that are specific to schools and they've already made sure that they're meeting sodium standards. They have whole grains and so making sure that they don' contain synthetic dyes is another sensible step companies will easily take.

[Interviewer]

Can you name a couple of common foods that use the controversial dyes or contain them?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Can I ask one question before we go?

[Interviewer]

Sure.

[Sarah Sorcher]

I realized I didn't adjust my glasses. Am I Getting glare?

[Cheryl Akison]

No, there's no glare.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Okay, good.

[Interviewer]

All right.

[Sarah Sorcher]

I usually tilt them down. All right, can you ask that again?

[Interviewer]

Can you name some common foods that contain these controversial food dyes?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yes, but I'm going to need to use my phone for that because we've got a list here. And I wish I had my list of corporate commitments because I could probably name ones from companies that have promised to take the dies out.

[Interviewer]

You could maybe have someone email that to Daniel when you get it.

[Sarah Sorcher]

All right. And do you want brands or do you want categories?

[Interviewer]

I'd say brands, which people know.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Okay.

[Interviewer]

You can even read it if you want. There's nothing wrong with that if it's easier for you.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yeah, I'm trying to find. We just put out some side by sides on titanium dioxide, which I really want to be able to pull up. I don't think we have anything on multiples. So here's a surprising one. So Campbell's uses. Okay, it's a long name. So Campbell's Soup uses titanium dioxide.

[Interviewer]

You can look at me and stuff.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Sorry, sorry. Campbell's Soup uses titanium Dio for added colors in Healthy Request Chunky Chicken Corn Chowder Soup.

[Interviewer]

The Healthy Soup.

[Sarah Sorcher]

The Healthy Request Soup has titanium dioxide. We've also got Kraft Cheddar Fat Free Shredded Cheese uses titanium dioxide. So it's not always. It's a whitening agent, but it's used in colorful foods to make the food brighter. So you really have to check that label to see if it's present. We've seen it in gravy. Great value. Country Sausage Gravy and Lunchables. Uploaded. Meal Kit with Turkey, Ham and American Sub Sandwich has titanium dioxide.

[Interviewer]

What about the strong colors? Are we talking about Kraft Mac and Cheese, Doritos, Cheetos? Do you have any of those listed?

[Sarah Sorcher]

So, interestingly, Kraft Original Mac and Cheese Macaroni and Cheese Dinner is free of titanium dioxide. I think, you know, Kraft has come under a lot of fire for including additives in its foods and they've made an effort to clean up their foods.

[Interviewer]

But what about the orange dye or the red dyes?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Oh, yeah.

[Interviewer]

If you know any of those.

[Sarah Sorcher]

I wish I had sort of one with all of them. I should have told me beforehand.

[Interviewer]

Okay, sorry. I'll look them up. We'll list and show some of them.

[Sarah Sorcher]

Okay.

[Interviewer]

If a parent is concerned and wants to know what to look for on a label, if you can't just look at the color of the food and know, what would you recommend?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yeah. So it can be difficult to know which food additives are harmful and which are not harmful. And it's hard to go just by the name alone because a chemically sounding name might not indicate a safety risk. For example, potassium chloride might sound scary, but that is a very healthy substitute for sodium that can increase your potassium levels and help you reduce sodium. So with respect to the food dyes, a lot of the numbered food dyes, and let me just make sure I don't name the wrong numbers here. All right, so dyes like red, 40, red 3, yellow, 5 and 6, these are all either associated with cancer or behavior risks or both. Titanium dioxide is another one that's not associated with behavioral risks, but it's been banned in the EU out of concern for DNA damage for other additives. Center for Science in the Public Interest has a website, Chemical Cuisine, that actually rates the safety of different food additives and will advise consumers whether to avoid or caution or whether something's perfectly safe. So that's another resource that we offer.

[Interviewer]

Can you go back to before you knew about this topic? Do you remember anything when you found out that kind of surprised you or you thought was really interesting along the way?

[Sarah Sorcher]

Yeah, I would say hearing some of the stories from individual families, it's a surprise. Sort of how very clear it is that they'll have a story where they were having issues in a child and they pulled out the dyes. The issue's resolved when they showed them again, they were seeing an issue. So just that very clear connection of causation for that one child has been really compelling and persuasive for me that there really are kids who are impacted by these dyes.

[Interviewer]

And if there's sort of a takeaway message you would want people to have, with what you know about where we are with the state of dyes in our food, what would you say?

[Sarah Sorcher]

I would say, you know, it's really hard for consumers to police food labels themselves. You know, there's so much education that goes into it and the difficulty of having to read every ingredient list really carefully is just. It can be really overwhelming. And that burden really shouldn't be on consumers. We need a strong science based federal regulator to be stepping up and actually taking action to remove some of these dyes and give consumers the information they need. And FDA currently hasn't been living up to that obligation for Americans.

[Cheryl Akison]

Of course, there's another side to the story. Even though there's so much controversy surrounding these food additives, the food industry and so far, of course, the government says they're perfectly safe or they wouldn't be allowed in our food get the full story on full measure Sunday, December 15th to find out where to see the TV program, go to Cheryl akison.com Click the full measure tab for a list of stations and times, but if it's easier for you, you can always watch online for free. That's at FullMeasure News. The program feeds live around 9:35am every Sunday and then posts thereafter. So if you're listening to this after Sunday, December 15th, no problem. Just go to FullMeasure News and you can watch a replay of the report on artificial food dye and links to cancer add and more. I hope you enjoyed today's podcast and that if you did, you will leave a terrific review and share this content with your friends. Check out my other podcast, the Cheryl Akisson Podcast, and if you're interested in these topics, you are sure to be fascinated by the revelations in my new bestseller. Follow the How Big Pharma Misleads, Obscures, and Prevails there's useful information for everyone, from the novice who knows very little about these topics to people who think they know just about everything they are saying. This is a real page turner, a real life thriller, full of information that even they didn't know about and meticulously documented. Check out some of the five star reviews at Amazon and order one as a gift for the holidays for somebody you care about. Follow the Science is available everywhere. Do your own research. Make up your own mind. Think for yourself.