Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Government

California Becomes First US State to Ban Four 'Toxic' Food Additives (msn.com) 200

Posted by EditorDavid from the my-Peeps dept.
Nearly 12% of America's population is in California. And the Los Angeles Times is predicting changes to what they eat: California became the first state in the nation to prohibit four food additives found in popular cereal, soda, candy and drinks after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a ban on them Saturday. The California Food Safety Act will ban the manufacture, sale or distribution of brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, propylparaben and red dye No. 3 — potentially affecting 12,000 products that use those substances, according to the Environmental Working Group.

The legislation was popularly known as the "Skittles ban" because an earlier version also targeted titanium dioxide, used as a coloring agent in candies including Skittles, Starburst and Sour Patch Kids, according to the Environmental Working Group. But the measure, Assembly Bill 418, was amended in September to remove mention of the substance...

Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel (D-Woodland Hills), who authored AB 418, hailed the move as a "huge step in our effort to protect children and families in California from dangerous and toxic chemicals in our food supply." Gabriel said the bill won't ban any foods or products but will require food companies to make "minor modifications" to their recipes and switch to safer alternative ingredients. The use of the chemicals has already been banned in the European Union's 27 nations as well as many other countries due to scientific research linking them to cancer, reproductive issues, and behavioral and developmental problems in children, Gabriel said. Many major brands and manufacturers — including Coke, Pepsi, Gatorade and Panera — have voluntarily stopped using the additives because of concerns about their affect on human health. Brominated vegetable oil was previously used in Mountain Dew, but Pepsi Co. has since stopped using it in the beverage. It is still used, however, in generic soda brands such as Walmart's Great Value-branded Mountain Lightning. Propylparaben and potassium bromate are commonly found in baked goods. Red dye no. 3 is used by Just Born Quality Confections to color pink and purple marshmallow Peeps candy, according to Consumer Reports. "What we're really trying to get them to do is to change their recipes," Gabriel told The Times in March. "All of these are nonessential ingredients...."

"This is a milestone in food safety, and California is once again leading the nation," said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, which co-sponsored the bill along with Consumer Reports. The law could affect food across the country, Cook said, because the size of California's economy might prompt manufacturers to produce just one version of their product rather than separate ones for the state and the rest of the nation.
A study by California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (cited in the bill) found that "consumption of synthetic food dyes can result in hyperactivity and other neurobehavioral problems in some children, and that children vary in their sensitivity to synthetic food dyes. The report also found that current federal levels for safe intake of synthetic food dyes may not sufficiently protect children's behavioral health." The reports adds that America's Food and Drug Administration had set levels for the additives" "decades ago," and that those levels "do not reflect newer research."

The Los Angeles Times notes that the law won't take effect until January of 2027 — and that it imposes fines of "up to $10,000 for violations."

The Times also points out that former California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger had endorsed the bill as "common sense".
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California Becomes First US State to Ban Four 'Toxic' Food Additives More

California Becomes First US State to Ban Four 'Toxic' Food Additives

Comments Filter:

  • food colouring WTF (Score:5, Insightful)

    by KiloByte ( 825081 ) on Sunday October 08, 2023 @12:54PM (#63910141)

    I can understand putting a risky chemical that would prolong the shelf life or stop turning it into mush. But here we have colors for fluffy's sake! So the candy having an exact shade your marketing team picked is worth it poisoning people.

    • A few years ago I bought the EU version of Fruit Loops. I noticed right away that it looked very different. I also noticed that it tasted like crap. If I remember correctly it was so bad that I looked at the ingredients and wasn't surprised when I saw a vegetable listed there. That was just wrong.

      I don't eat a lot of Fruit Loops. I probably have 4 bowls a years. Plus, I think that it has always been a poor idea to market heavily sugared cereals to children as healthy. However, I will admit that if w

      • Pours cereal into bowl... "what the... is that a rutabaga?"

        • Pours cereal into bowl... "what the... is that a rutabaga?"

          Breakfast cereal should be grain free! Never mind the name, or the fact grain farming was one of the transformative steps in human society. There are whole groups out there to villainize wheat, or corn, or rice. Be happy you have grown up in mostly sane times.

      • A few years ago I bought the EU version of Fruit Loops.

        If you bought something actually called Fruit Loops then they weren't supposed to be real Froot Loops to begin with.

      • I also noticed that it tasted like crap.

        The EU version of fruitloops contains less than half the sugar of the American one, and about double the salt (because you still need something to trigger people's addictive senses, and the European palate in general is far saltier than the American one). That is the difference you taste.

        If I remember correctly it was so bad that I looked at the ingredients and wasn't surprised when I saw a vegetable listed there. That was just wrong.

        There are no vegetables in the EU fruit loops. There are "vegetable extracts", a common term for natural colouring. They are entirely flavourless, and have the benefit of not causing cancer. Bonus points the food you eat do

      • I like my European Fruit Loops just fine. They are a delicious treat I almost never indulge in, because despite probably having much less sugar than the US counterpart, it's still a lot of sugar and calories.
        You just need to reset your over strained taste sensors, perhaps by avoiding sweet taste entirely, for a few weeks.

    • Re:food colouring WTF (Score:5, Insightful)

      by guygo ( 894298 ) on Sunday October 08, 2023 @02:36PM (#63910331)

      I remember when they finally banned Red Dye #2 because it was both shown to be carcinogenic. That was almost 50 years ago, long enough for people to completely forget about the "food" companies' single motivation: Profits Profits Profits. They don't give a damn about what their product does to kids, as long as Mom and Dad keep buying it. Bright colors can give a "food" product the extra edge ("Mommy Mommy I want Skittles!") over your competitors that can turn into millions more bucks for the 'zecks and shareholders.
      The visual image of a food has a very powerful influence on that food's taste. I am sure there has been extensive research on how kids (and adults!) go for brightly colored food more than otherwise and will say that the bright red food tastes "better" than the same food in a dull brown or green. "I do not like them, Sam I Am" is a meme for a good reason.
      It sucks, but it always boils down to Profits here in Capitalistan. Screw the kids, we're talking about whether a CEO's daughter gets her new Mercedes this year or not! Heavens...

      • We used to eets zee boogs to get red candy but then people got "weirded out" so they started using coal tar distillates instead and then people were sick and happy.

  • I tried to look up how many years ago the EU banned the food colorings that use petrochemicals. They told M&Ms that they'd have to put "We color our candy with gasoline-like chemicals" if they wanted to sell it like that in the EU. M&M decided to just not sell them the toxic colors instead, so no red or blue or green candies in the EU.
    It looks like it was about 10 years ago that this happened?
    Did you see the article about how half the government board that makes food recommendations is on big pharma

    • Re:how many years ago did EU opt out? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by skam240 ( 789197 ) on Sunday October 08, 2023 @01:29PM (#63910199)

      Why does fake color make things so much cheaper? Do they get paid to dispose of it in their food?

      It's because they're cheaper than most natural coloring methods in food. Meanwhile coloring methods are used in food like balsamic vinegar so they can use cheaper ingredients. It covers things up in other words. Those same balsamics likely also have thickeners and / or non authentic flavoring that's making them cheaper as well.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hey! ( 33014 )

        Yeah, the idea that industrial food science is bad because it's poisoning you is probably missing a bigger point. Industrial food science takes cheap food, often consisting of empty calories, and makes it super-palable.

      • I use an American bottled Italian origin balsamic vinegar, ordinary quality but organic, $8.50 for 375 ml. It lists 2 ingredients: organic grape juice, 25% organic grape must. It is not fancy, but it fits my recipes. No non-grape mouth feel additives nor colorings. The same outfit sells fancier versions, longer aged.

    • It's a bit frustrating because chemically the main components of gasoline aren't anything like these artificial colors. Red Dye No. 3 looks more like Benzene than gasoline for example, or really it looks just like Xanthene. I think any organization that wants to promote consumer safety needs to be very honest when educating the public, or they risk losing their trust. Telling people easily dismissed lies will make them question everything else they say.

      • Red Dye No. 3 looks more like Benzene than gasoline for example, or really it looks just like Xanthene.

        I would think "benzene-like chemicals" could have been effectively used in place of "gasoline-like chemicals" in their threat.

        Of course, part of the problem is it often seems our bodies simply have problems with substances that aren't naturally occurring, even if they are similar to natural substances. But just saying that doesn't sufficently scare people, apparently.

        • Of course, part of the problem is it often seems our bodies simply have problems with substances that aren't naturally occurring, even if they are similar to natural substances. But just saying that doesn't sufficently scare people, apparently.

          To be fair your body won't deal well with everything naturally occurring either. Not at all.

          • Good old amygdalin in stone fruits makes lovely cyanide in our bodies. All natural.

            Carbon monoxide occurs naturally in quite regularly. But our body is terrible at dealing with it except in the smallest amounts.

    • Re:how many years ago did EU opt out? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by GuB-42 ( 2483988 ) on Sunday October 08, 2023 @03:32PM (#63910429)

      There is nothing wrong with using petrochemicals in food. A molecule is a molecule, and oil is made of organic matter, like plants. Many things natural are toxic, and many man-made chemicals are perfectly fine, even beneficial. And I mean, if big corporations have been poisoning us for years, how comes life expectancy have been going up for so long? (if you are looking at a chart, the drop after 2019 is mostly due to covid). Of course, not everything big corporations do is healthy, that's why they have to be kept in check, and that's exactly what is happening right now, with some substances being banned.

      And as for representatives of "big pharma" and "big food" being part of the board that makes food recommendation, of course they are here, I mean, you need to have people on board who know what they are talking about. Decisions do not happen in a vacuum, before banning or authorizing a substance, one has to know how it is used, what are the alternatives if it is banned, what it will replace if it is authorized, the economic and sanitary impact, and for that, you need input from people working in the field. People need to eat, and it has to be affordable, because otherwise, the poor will die. Food is a complex topic, maybe the most complex, simple argument are almost always wrong.

      Public opinion, corruption, personal freedom and monkey brains are also part of the equation. Take alcohol for instance, it is a known poison, there is absolutely no doubt about that, it kills thousands a year directly, and many more indirectly. The latest, highly reliable study in Canada says there is no safe dose and there are even genetic arguments. From a health perspective, it should be completely banned, and in some countries, it is, and yet, in most of of the world, it is not, and I am happy that it is not. Regulation regarding alcohol are a balance between personal freedoms, health, the interests of "big alcohol", traditions, etc... And the same can be said of every other substance.

      And real balsamic vinegar is very different from the one with the coloring in it, in fact, the one with the "fake coloring" shouldn't be called balsamic vinegar at all. Real balsamic vinegar is made of aged grape musk, a process that takes several years and involves reduction in different barrels, the color is a result of this process. The fake kind you find for cheap in supermarkets is flavored wine vinegar, and the coloring is just so that it look like the real deal, and a simple taste test will tell you that it is absolutely not.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Ichijo ( 607641 )

        if big corporations have been poisoning us for years, how comes life expectancy have been going up for so long?

        Because we have better medicine, better healthcare, better hygiene, cleaner air and water, better working conditions and so on. And if big corporations hadn't been poisoning us all this time, our life expectancy would be even higher.

      • A molecule is a molecule, and oil is made of organic matter, like plants.

        So you're saying eating a nice fresh banana is the same as eating one that has been laying in the cupboard for a year? I mean it's still a plant, still a banana right, so by your logic it's good to go.

        And I mean, if big corporations have been poisoning us for years, how comes life expectancy have been going up for so long?

        Medical advancements. Our life expectancy has gone up *despite* big corporations feeding us literal known carcinogens. Oh and because we ban things. Don't assume that this is only a 90s/new millennium problem or even a big corporation problem. We've been eating various poisons since there have been commercial

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by UpnAtom ( 551727 )

      I tried to look up how many years ago the EU banned the food colorings that use petrochemicals. They told M&Ms that they'd have to put "We color our candy with gasoline-like chemicals" if they wanted to sell it like that in the EU. M&M decided to just not sell them the toxic colors instead, so no red or blue or green candies in the EU.

      Not only are there plenty of red, blue and green candies in the EU, I've eaten red, blue and green M&Ms in the EU. We just get the non-poisonous versions.

      https://www.wbur.org/hereandno... [wbur.org]

    • I tried to look up how many years ago the EU banned the food colorings that use petrochemicals. They told M&Ms that they'd have to put "We color our candy with gasoline-like chemicals" if they wanted to sell it like that in the EU. M&M decided to just not sell them the toxic colors instead, so no red or blue or green candies in the EU.

      Actually not true at all. For all of history the EU M&Ms have come in the same colour variants as in the USA. There was however a period in the 70s where there were no red M&Ms, ... anywhere. And the reason behind it is that red dye No 2 got banned ... by the USA FDA. Back before the EU existed the USA seemingly cared about people's health. Interestingly M&Ms used red dye No 3, but they removed the red M&Ms anyway because the public was on an "anti artificial colour" bandwagon after the FDA'

  • is titanium dioxide toxic ? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by saha ( 615847 ) on Sunday October 08, 2023 @01:57PM (#63910243)
    "European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)—an agency that issues scientific advice on food risks—evaluating the safety of the chemical as a food additive in a 2021 report. EFSA noted that it could not definitively say that titanium dioxide was toxic. " "Back in 1979 the National Cancer Institute also evaluated the potential toxicity of titanium dioxide in food in rats and mice, exposing them to large amounts of the chemical for two full years, which is most of a rat’s lifetime. They found no indication that titanium dioxide in food could cause cancer." From my knowledge, titanium dioxide is used in all sorts of things and is very inert in the human body. From a chemical and biochemical standpoint. It's used in sunscreen and a lot of make up too. While removing it from food probably is okay, I actually don't see any evidence from studies in the past regarding toxicity. For example. A titanium hip joint replacement is literally coated with titanium dioxide. Same with chromium. It's the oxide layer on the outside that prevents further attack to it. Which is why we put chromium or moly in stainless steels . https://www.scientificamerican... [scientificamerican.com].
    • The concern is the build up of TiO2 nanoparticles in the body. In that sense, they're a bit like PFAS & only show a cumulative effect over longer time-scales. Apparently, there are a number of reasons to suspect that they may well be harmful & have been linked at least to colorectal cancer & IBS. The difficulty is that they're so ubiquitous that it's hard to find comparable control groups for the durations of time necessary.

    • A titanium hip joint replacement is literally coated with titanium dioxide.

      This may be a misdirect. People who get hip joint replacements are not likely to live long enough to develop negative effects of something that only has a small impact. Quite different from shoving skittles down your foodhole for 50 years.

      Titanium dioxide accumulates in the body when ingested. That is the primary concern.

      • TiO2 also is photocatalytic, but needs 3.2 eV (387 nm) photons to wake up.
        • As such, TiO2 Nanoparticels are used in paints and coatings to create self cleaning surfaces. You may also find them in aircleaners, where the freed electrons break down airborn pollutants.

  • CA might be able to ban mfg/sales of the pure additives, but can they ban products containing those things? All they might be doing is forcing the manufacture out-of-state where they get diluted then imported. At increased cost, natch.

    • The ban may violate the interstate commerce clause. That is, when it comes to the trade of a common substance (in this case, basic foodstuffs), it may be up to Congress to do that, not an individual state government, unless that particular food is manufactured and sold only in-state. It's certainly grounds for legal action.

      And before anyone brings up the whole gas-powered car thing, that's probably permitted under the exceptions carved out for the State of California by Congress when they authorized the c

      • The ban may violate the interstate commerce clause. That is, when it comes to the trade of a common substance (in this case, basic foodstuffs), it may be up to Congress to do that, not an individual state government, unless that particular food is manufactured and sold only in-state. It's certainly grounds for legal action.

        And before anyone brings up the whole gas-powered car thing, that's probably permitted under the exceptions carved out for the State of California by Congress when they authorized the creation of CARB. Or so I would imagine. Not that it's any better but at least the issue has been addressed at a national level.

        It's being tested thanks to republicans. https://apnews.com/article/wyo... [apnews.com]

        Wyoming is trying to ban medication that is federally legal.

        • Nice try, but you know that isn't the same thing. I could just as easily bring up California's ban on "large magazines" for pistols.

          We're discussing food additives. They're generally benign in that they won't instantly kill you through trauma or acute toxicity. They aren't sold or marketed as a surefire way to kill someone or something. They're just basic trade goods.

          There are plenty of products where states have (perhaps inappropriately) taken on the role of regulating interstate commerce and gotten awa

      • The ban may violate the interstate commerce clause.

        If California can ban the sale of animal products from animals raised in extreme confinement in other states, this is highly unlikely to be considered in violation of the commerce clause.

    • It filters down. California mandated stricter emissions standards for vehicles because they had a terrible smog problem for decades. The auto companies bitched and moaned and then as if by magic found a way to make it work. Since the economy in California is so large it made sense for the companies to implement the changes nationwide. Thanks for California the nations air quality is better.

  • Our favorite sword and shield. Why can't children just be children?

    Because they are busy being our cultural war implements. Sigh.

  • You say "Fuck California" and leave the market.

  • Why not?
    If you walk into a CA hotel you see a big poster warning you that hazardous materials are stored here (!) because....in some of the cleaning closets, there are cleaning chemicals.

    Tell me, how USEFUL is this information?
    Do you think people generally don't know hotels clean their facilities? Or do you think the people who made reservations and finally arrived look at the sign and decide to sleep in their car because of the "scary chemicals!" inside?

    Or...does everyone look at it, shrug at how dumb tha

  • Can the entire fucking West Coast just drop off into the Pacific?

    At this point, nothing of any real, lasting value will be lost.

  • Ban HFCS! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Pravetz-82 ( 1259458 ) on Monday October 09, 2023 @03:02AM (#63911355)
    If we have to select a single ingredient that ought to be banned that would be the High Fructose Corn Syrup.
    You, americans, have it in everything - including bread, sausages, even mustard...
    Fructose is metabolized only in the liver and it is straining it similar to how alcohol does. Also it doesn't register properly with the mechanism that controls how hungry you are.
    If you want sweet - use normal sugar (sucrose) or glucose. Those can be consumed by every cell in the body.

    • Re:Ban HFCS! (Score:4, Informative)

      by mjwx ( 966435 ) on Monday October 09, 2023 @08:06AM (#63911633)

      If we have to select a single ingredient that ought to be banned that would be the High Fructose Corn Syrup.
      You, americans, have it in everything - including bread, sausages, even mustard...
      Fructose is metabolized only in the liver and it is straining it similar to how alcohol does. Also it doesn't register properly with the mechanism that controls how hungry you are.
      If you want sweet - use normal sugar (sucrose) or glucose. Those can be consumed by every cell in the body.

      HFCS was used because it was cheap, corn is (or at least was) largely subsidised in the US. Sugar cane tends to require a warmer climate than corn and takes longer to grow, 9-16 months for sugar cane and up to 24 moths for colder climates, Corn grows in about 3 months.

      Europe gets the majority of it's sugar from beets, you can get corn syrup from corn without the fructose but it doesn't taste the same, unlike beet sugar.

      As for adding sweeteners to everything, yeah, that is a huge problem in the US and one they need to train their society out of. At the very least, to start using more natural sweeteners like honey and syrups. They'll taste different, but people will get over that in time.

    • HFCS is functionally equivalent to sugar, and has about the same amount of fructose in it. You aren't wrong about fructose and you aren't wrong that we add sugar to everything in America. But there's really no difference between HFCS and sucrose. Please do some research.

Slashdot Top Deals

The person who can smile when something goes wrong has thought of someone to blame it on.

Close