Potassium bromate, propylparaben, brominated vegetable oil, and red dye number 3: no, this is not a list of materials for an organic chemistry experiment. Instead it’s a group of food additives that will be banned as part of the California Food Safety Act, which California Governor Gavin Newsom signed in October. The legislation won’t go into effect until January of 2027, but it’s made nationwide news – after all, these are common food additives present in everything from fruit cups to cinnamon rolls. Any entity in California that manufactures or sells food products containing these additives will be fined beginning in 2027. Should other states follow suit? And are there other additives used in our foods that ought to be banned?
Food additives are typically present in processed foods or foods produced on an industrial scale. They have a range of uses, such as improving safety, increasing food storage time, or modifying the appearance or taste of the food product. Minimally processed and unprocessed foods don’t contain food additives. Think of an apple picked right from a tree versus an apple-flavored candy. The fresh apple is unprocessed, but the apple-flavored candy is probably filled with corn syrup, artificial flavoring, and food coloring. We all know that sugary candy isn’t the healthiest option on the snack hierarchy. What we are starting to learn more about are the specific effects the additives in candy and other processed foods might have on our bodies.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned red dye number 3 – the same chemical targeted by the new California bill – all the way back in 1990. Oddly enough, they only banned its use in cosmetics, after some evidence that it caused cancer in lab animals. Yet the FDA still allows red dye number 3 to be used in plenty of food products, like candy corn and Pez. The other additives banned by the California Food Safety Act are also linked to harmful effects on human health. Brominated vegetable oil and potassium bromate are associated with respiratory and nervous system damage, while propylparaben may cause damage to human reproductive systems. Several popular companies, like Coca-Cola and Dunkin’ Donuts, have already voluntarily stopped using these additives.
The impacts of food additives on human health may disturb consumers, but it is important not to become paranoid or panicky. Kathleen Melanson, a professor of nutrition at the University of Rhode Island, says that while it is best not to consume the foods containing these additives on a regular basis, “an occasional treat of a food containing them should not pose a risk.” She also points out that the animal studies showing health harm may feature doses of additives that are much higher than most humans would reasonably consume. Still, it’s a good idea to minimize these additives in your diet, and to eat more unprocessed or minimally processed foods. This isn’t always easy. One obvious benefit of sugary cereals, frozen dinners, and candy is that they’re cheap. It is therefore no surprise that purchases of processed and ultra-processed foods are significantly higher among households of the lowest socioeconomic status.
Simply telling people to avoid potentially dangerous food additives is not the best public health response, given that some people who are struggling financially will feel they have no choice. Going the way of California may be an option, but more research on a range of food additives needs to be done to identify other potentially dangerous products, and public health cannot wait too long. In the meantime, the British Medical Journal offers a number of potential strategies to move people towards healthier food options, including meal sharing services within communities, certain sales reporting requirements or taxes to encourage stores and supermarkets to move away from ultra-processed foods, and changes to food procurement policies on a national level, which could “shape the food served in public sector establishments such as schools, hospitals, and government offices.” Finding ways to improve the socioeconomic standing of low-SES households is obviously another important strategy. Community organizations that specialize in job training services could supplement such services with food and finance education curriculum.
Given that California’s new legislation around food additives will not go into effect for another three years, it will probably take researchers a long time to determine the impacts of banning certain food additives. We cannot simply wait for this research before taking action, however. By applying a little precautionary principle and recognizing that various food additives do appear to be linked to poorer health outcomes, we can set goals for ourselves and our communities to consume foods that are closer to their natural sources, that are unprocessed or minimally processed, and that are known to have positive health effects for human beings. The “perfect diet” is an elusive concept, and as Professor Melanson says, certain junk foods, in moderation, aren’t going to kill us. Nonetheless, we should begin to think about how we can become healthier as individuals and communities, and how we can ensure that all of us have the opportunity to access healthy and nutritious foods that don’t require brominated vegetable oil or red dye number 3 to look or taste good.
