_cleanup.png)
Understanding Food Dye Bans: What’s Behind the Crackdown on Artificial Colors?
- Linda Gerace, BSN, RN
- 8 hours ago
- 9 min read
Do recently enacted bans on food dyes have you seeing red? Is there really any harm in adding a little pop of color to beverages, candy, and popsicles? After all, humans have added natural dyes to food for the last two to three thousand years. Synthetic dyes, although not as old, also found their place in food production, as well as cosmetics and drug manufacturing, shortly after they were discovered in the mid-1850s. So, what is behind the recent shift in food safety policies? Why did the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in January 2025, revoke authorization for Red Dye #3 in food and drug manufacturing? Following this, in April 2025, the FDA along with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced a series of measures to phase out all petroleum-based synthetic dyes from the U.S. food supply by the end of 2026. You might be wondering, are food dyes really that dangerous? Did the FDA and HHS go too far with this most recent action? Here, we will explore the history of food dyes and the controversies that have existed for decades over their safety. Then, we will look at the industry response to food dye bans, and tips for consumers who choose to avoid artificial food colors in their family’s diet.
A Brief History of Food Dyes
Food dyes are natural or synthetic colorants added to food, primarily, to improve appearance and stimulate appetite. We know that around 3,500 years ago, Egyptians used natural dyes like saffron to color candy and wine, cosmetics, and hair. In the mid-1850s, British chemist, William Henry Perkins, discovered the first synthetic dye. Like those that quickly followed, this dye was a by-product of coal processing which led to the term “coal-tar colors.” Today, most synthetic dyes are petroleum-based.
Early synthetic dyes quickly found use in commercial food production as well as cosmetics and drug manufacturing because they were less costly to produce than natural dyes. As food production moved from farm to factory during the 1800s, manufacturers found it beneficial to artificially color processed foods to make them more appetizing. The manufacture of synthetic dyes soared to more than 700 different color additives, and, without safety standards, these artificial colors were often used to hide old and inferior or defective foods. More troubling is that many dyes were produced using carcinogenic substances and poisons such as mercury, lead, and arsenic. After discovering this, Congress passed the Food and Drug Act in 1906, which, among other regulations, prohibited toxic and poisonous ingredients in dyes.
Today, food manufacturers continue to use synthetic dyes for various reasons.
To make food look appetizing.
To enhance natural colors
To correct natural variations and enhance naturally occurring colors.
To provide color to colorless foods or offset color loss in foods resulting from exposure to light, air, temperature extremes, moisture, and storage conditions.
Of the nine FDA certified artificial colors currently permitted for use in food production, three colors account for 90% of all food color usage: FD&C Red No. 40 or Allura Red, FD&C Yellow No. 5 or Tartrazine, and FD&C Yellow No. 6 or Sunset Yellow. In the U.S., these artificial colors are primarily used in processed foods with low nutritional value, such as juice and soft drinks, frozen dairy desserts, puddings and gelatins, cakes and frosting, chips and salty snacks, condiments, and some breakfast cereals.
Health Concerns and Scientific Debate
Overview of Studies
In 1974, pediatrician and allergist, Benjamin Feingold’s, book Why Your Child is Hyperactive was published. It was controversial because it contradicted what most psychiatrists understood to be the cause of hyperactivity, the most diagnosed childhood psychiatric disorder. Instead of attributing hyperactivity to genetic neurological dysfunction, like most psychiatrists, Feingold attributed it to the large amount of artificial food colors, flavorings, and preservatives consumed by children. He proposed eliminating food additives from children’s diets, and this became widely known as the Feingold diet. Although physicians and scientists largely dismissed Feingold’s theory, tens of thousands of parents found success using the Feingold diet. For the next 45 years, however, little changed in the scientific community’s thinking about food colorings and other additives. Few or no research studies supported Feingold’s theory about food additives and hyperactivity, yet, parents continued advocating for better regulations on artificial food colors and other additives.
Then, in April 2021, the state of California released a report confirming that artificial food colors can cause ADHD and other neurobehavioral issues. Among the findings of the U.C. Davis and U.C. Berkeley researchers is that the FDA’s Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) levels for artificial food dyes are based on 35- to 70-year-old studies that were not designed to detect the types of behavioral effects observed in children. When compared with newer studies, they acknowledged that the FDA’s ADIs may not adequately protect children. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) now recommends that parents eliminate artificial food dyes from a child’s diet if they observe behavioral changes with their use.
Research has also found that food additives, including artificial colors, may affect adult populations, worsening asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and causing an imbalance in the fragile gut microbiome. In 2023, researchers in China published findings of a literature review highlighting the impact of food additives on the gut microbiome. The review revealed that Red No. 40 causes intestinal inflammation (colitis) and potentially causes inflammatory bowel disease (Crohn’s disease or ulcerative colitis) in mice. In other animal studies, Yellow No. 5 caused an imbalance in the gut microbiome of juvenile carp fish. The researchers concluded, however, that even though food additives negatively affected the gut microbiome, there was not enough data to adequately illustrate the impact. Therefore, they recommended further studies should be conducted.
Another literature review published in 2025 from King Faisal University in Saudi Arabia, demonstrated that food additives have a negative effect on respiratory health, causing oxidative stress, systemic inflammation, and immune dysregulation. Ponceau 4R, specifically, may damage lung tissue, impairing respiratory function. The same researchers also noted that Yellow No. 5 is genotoxic, meaning it can damage genetic information in the cells, potentially leading to cancer.
Public Health & Regulatory Views
The FDA regulates color additives used in the U.S. and states that they are safe when used properly. They also claim that allergic reactions to color additives are rare. In 2011, the FDA’s Food Advisory Committee (FAC) concluded that consumption of certified color additives is not linked to children’s behavioral issues. Today, the FDA concedes that some children may be sensitive to food colors and recommends that parents who desire to limit color additives in their children’s diet should read labels carefully and discuss any concerns with their family physician.
In the European Union, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) carries out risk assessments of food additives. In their research on food colors and hyperactivity in children, they concluded that six artificial food colors could cause hyperactivity in some children. These are: Sunset yellow FCF (E110), Quinoline yellow (E104), Carmoisine (E122), Allura Red (E129), Tartrazine (E102), and Ponceau 4R (E124). As a result of this finding, all foods containing these colors must carry a warning label, and food manufacturers are encouraged to find alternatives to these additives.
Regulatory Actions on Food Dyes
On September 28, 2024, California became the first U.S. state to ban six food dyes deemed harmful to students in a study conducted by the California Office of Health Hazard Assessment. Published in 2021, the study determined that food dyes and colorants are known to make some children vulnerable to behavioral difficulties and decreased attention. Prior to that, in 2023, California also banned Red No. 3 in food manufactured, delivered, and sold in the state.
Despite the FDA concluding that artificial food colors are safe to consume when used according to regulations, and despite their claim that most children have no adverse reaction to artificial food colors, in January 2025, the FDA issued an order revoking authorization for FD&C Red No.3. This was based on the Delaney Clause of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act). This clause forbids authorization of any food additive found to cause cancer in animals. The FD&C determined that a 2022 petition did show evidence Red No. 3 caused cancer in male rats when exposed to high levels of the dye.
The FD&C followed this with an announcement in April 2025 that all petroleum-based food dyes will be phased out from the nation’s food supply by the end of 2026. While this is not an outright ban, the FDA is working with the food industry to cooperate in transitioning from petroleum-based dyes to natural dyes. The FDA is also partnering with the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to conduct studies to determine the effect of all food additives on children’s development.
The EU, UK, Australia, and Canada have not officially banned artificial food dyes, but they do require labeling on food items that contain artificial colors. Several EU countries have banned artificial colors, but most only require appropriate labeling.
Industry and Consumer Reactions
Industry Response to Regulatory Actions
Some sectors of the food industry are pushing back against the recent FDA announcement. The International Association of Color Manufacturers (IACM), for example, issued a statement reaffirming the safety of artificial food colors, noting that the FDA announcement is not an outright ban, as it currently calls on food manufacturers to voluntarily cooperate, nor did the FDA offer any new scientific evidence to support the announcement. Furthermore, the transition to natural food colors will not be easy, they claim. Testing natural colors, reformulating products, restructuring manufacturing practices, modifying packaging, manufacturing new products on a mass scale, and distributing new products across the country, will take longer than the 18 months the FDA is recommending.
Many trade groups and other industry organizations, however, while not willing to declare food dyes to be harmful, have expressed willingness to work with the FDA and the current administration to satisfy consumer demand for a healthier food supply, while encouraging more research on the impact of dyes in vulnerable populations.
Shifting Consumers Preferences
A growing health and wellness industry is fueling much of the consumer push for better ingredients and fewer unnecessary and potentially unhealthy food additives. The industry focuses on health, fitness, nutrition, appearance, sleep, and mindfulness. As of 2024, health and wellness was a nearly $7 trillion industry and it only seems to be growing each year.
A 2018 survey for Food Industry Executive found that 93% of Americans want to eat healthy sometimes, while 63% of Americans want to eat healthy most or all the time. The survey report came to three conclusions.
Consumers read food labels and advertisements looking for claims of health and wellness, ethical, and environmental benefits. In a change from the 2016 survey, consumers increasingly want natural and organic foods as well as foods without artificial ingredients and preservatives.
Consumers want their food to have a wide range of benefits. Reflecting the impact of a growing health & wellness industry in the U.S., consumers desire food that has better ingredients, is ethically sourced, and as natural as possible.
Consumers will pay more for food that delivers the benefits it claims. 60-70% of consumers said they were willing to pay premium prices for natural, ethical, enhanced, or “less of” foods. This was up 10 percentage points from the 2016 survey.
Consumer Tips to Avoid Artificial Colors
If you are looking to reduce or avoid food dyes in your family’s diet, here are some tips to make it easier:
Reduce or eliminate processed, packaged foods. Artificial colors are used in many highly processed foods, especially cereals and dessert products.
Learn to identify artificial colors on food labels. FD&C Yellow No. 5 might be listed as Yellow No. 5, Yellow #5, or Tartrazine.
Ditch the soda and drink more water. It’s healthier and free of artificial sweeteners.
Focus on what your children can eat, not what they cannot eat. Do not just say, “No.” Instead, offer your children a colorful variety of healthier options like fruit and veggies chopped in fun and decorative shapes.
Choose organic brands whenever possible. USDA-certified organic foods cannot contain artificial colors.
Three swaps for healthier versions:
Instead of fruit-flavored yogurt, which is usually artificially colored, offer plain yogurt mixed with fruit. Add a touch of honey or real maple syrup, if desired.
Make your own snacks with your children. Healthier cookies and popsicles are favorite treats.
Make oatmeal instead of opening a box of sugary cereals. Let your children add their favorite fruits, cinnamon, and a touch of honey or real maple syrup, if desired.
Key Takeaways and Conclusion
Advances of the first and second industrial revolutions allowed the transition of most food production from family gardens to corporate factories. The discovery of faster modes of travel allowed packaged foods to be carried across multiple states and eventually across oceans. A wider variety of food choices was made possible through these advances. And yet, not everything that comes with such advancement is good. Processed and packaged foods made with preservatives, colors, and flavorings provide a longer shelf life with consistent appearance and taste over time. Yet, the safety of these food additives continues to be questioned, while scientific studies offer inconsistent safety data.
Furthermore, making the switch from synthetic to natural food dyes over a brief time span may be an unrealistic goal, according to IACM, resulting in food supply disruptions and limited access to familiar grocery items.
Consumer food preferences are progressively shifting toward natural and less processed ingredients as evidenced by research and a growing health and wellness industry. The food manufacturing industry lags behind consumer preferences, however, in making healthier changes to mass-produced processed foods. Without the necessary research identifying harmful food ingredients, food manufacturers will continue to create products with additives to prevent early spoilage and allow foods to be safely transported across the country and overseas. Additives such as artificial food colors, however, are mainly used for appearance and can more easily be eliminated from the food supply. With a mounting body of evidence suggesting that artificial food colors may be harmful, the FDA, in phasing out petroleum-based food dyes, has taken a positive step toward ensuring the safety and well-being of all Americans.
References
Assessed and Endorsed by the MedReport Medical Review Board