This morning I told you about FDA hearings taking place today and tomorrow on the possible link between artificial food dyes and hyperactivity in some children. Now I’d like to share with you a guest blog post from food activist Robyn McCord O’Brien about the very different regulatory picture in other countries. (For more info on Robyn, be sure to check out her compelling TEDx Austin talk here.) This post also appeared on her Allergy Kids Foundation website and portions of it were taken from her thought-provoking book, The Unhealthy Truth.
After you read the post, leave a comment below and you’ll be eligible to win one of three free copies of The Unhealthy Truth. The contest period closes at noon CST tomorrow (March 31, 2011) and I’ll use a random number generator to pick the winners.
Serving Up Food Dyes, UK Style
by Robyn McCord O’Brien
Right now there is a lot of discussion around the science of food dyes. Do artificial colors contribute to hyperactivity in kids? Are food dyes responsible for ADHD? Is it the government’s job to take these dyes out of our kids’ foods or is it ours?
The fact of the matter is that you are going to get a different answer depending on who you ask. I learned this the hard way when I went to some of our leading pediatric allergists a few years ago to ask about the link between the introduction of GMOs into our food supply and the sudden epidemic we were seeing in the number of American kids with food allergies. They didn’t like the line of questioning and fired off some pretty aggressive responses. But given my background as a food industry analyst, I quickly learned that financial ties between doctors and agrichemical, food and pharmaceutical corporations can play a pretty important role in what these doctors are willing to say.
So when people get heated up around the science of food dyes, I find myself asking the same questions: Who has funded the research? Is there a financial incentive involved to protect the status quo? And are doctors that are speaking out on this issue in any way affiliated as spokespersons for either the food or pharmaceutical companies that stand to benefit from the continued use of these food dyes in foods?
Since there are usually extensive financial ties between doctors and food and pharmaceutical corporations, it is often helpful to turn to the consumer marketplace and food companies themselves for answers because money talks.
And interestingly, Kraft, Coca Cola and Wal-Mart have already removed these artificial food colors and dyes from the products that they distribute in other countries. They’ve reformulated their product lines in other countries and no longer include these food dyes, and they did it in response to consumer demand and an extraordinary study called the Southampton Study.
The Southampton Study was unusual in that it tested children on a combination of two ingredients: tartrazine (yellow #5) andsodium benzoate. The study’s designers knew that a child very rarely has occasion to ingest just a synthetic color or just a preservative; rather, a child who is gobbling up multicolored candies is probably taking in several colors and at least one preservative.
What’s amazing is that in the U.K., the federal food safety agency actually funded the Southampton Study that led to even U.S. corporations eliminating synthetic colors and sodium benzoate from their U.K. products.
And in response, a whole host of companies, including the U.K. branches of Wal-Mart, Kraft, Coca Cola and the Mars candy company (who make M&Ms), have voluntarily removed artificial colors, the preservative sodium benzoate, and even aspartame from their products. Particularly those marketed to kids.
When I first learned about this in the spring of 2007, I was stunned. Our American companies had removed these harmful ingredients from their products overseas—but not here?
When I first learned this, I found the information discouraging. But then I realized that we aren’t asking our corporations to reinvent the wheel, we are simply asking for them to place the same products on our grocery store shelves that they are selling overseas.
Because Kraft, Coca Cola and Wal-mart are living proof that is possible for giant corporations to make and sell kid-friendly, family-friendly, and healthy processed foods so that we can give our kids some special treats—like the U.K. versions of Starburst and Skittles, for example —without necessarily exposing them to a chemical cocktail that might also give them brain tumors, or leukemia, or the symptoms of ADHD, as the Center for Science in the Public Interest recently highlighted in their report “Rainbow of Risks”.
And it is inspiring (once you get over the initial shock) to see how far the companies have gone and how quickly they acted to remove these dyes from kids’ foods in other countries.
Asda, for example, the U.K. branch of Wal-Mart acted just one week “after details were leaked to the UK press of a study by researchers at Southampton University. . . ” They didn’t even wait for the study to be published—that’s how concerned they were about public opinion.
In an article published by the Food and Drink Federation, a Web site that monitors food issues in Europe, Jess Halliday reported that “Asda [U.K. Wal-Mart] has pledged to remove any artificial colours or flavours from its 9,000 own label products, as well as aspartame, hydrogenated fat, and flavour enhancers such as monosodium glutamate.”
Wow. The Southampton study didn’t even mention those last three items. Why was the U.K. Wal-Mart rushing to make such healthy choices, when the U.S. Wal-Mart still offered the same old stuff? Wal-Mart had even been slapped by a lawsuit from the Ajinomoto, the company that now makes aspartame, which claimed that U.K. Wal-Mart’s publicizing of its aspartame-free products was a kind of defamation—all while U.S. Wal-Mart continued to use the sweetener.
Can you imagine how grateful parents in the UK must be when they read this? “[U.K. Wal-Mart] will also meet the Food Standards Agency’s salt-reduction targets–two years ahead of the 2010 deadline,” the article continued.
Isn’t that amazing? Over in the U.K., our American companies rushed to meet government standards two whole years before they even go into effect. It begs the question, why?
According to Asda/U.K. Wal-Mart food trading director Darren Blackhurt, “We know that our customers, particularly those that are mums and dads, are becoming more and more concerned about what’s in the food they buy.” Indeed, the article continues, “consumer awareness of nutrition and food quality in the UK has soared in the last few years. . . ” Accordingly, U.K. Wal-Mart was planning to spend 30 million pounds, or about $50 million, to reformulate its product line, adding that, “in the main, taste will be unaffected.”
Pretty stunning, right? Clearly learning about this remarkable decision is sure to leave a few American parents a little hyperactive. And if you look at the decision a little more closely, you will discover that Asda/Wal-Mart was far from the only British company to respond to the Southampton Study in such a dramatic way. According to the Food and Drink Federation in the U.K., several companies—whether British-based or British division of American corporations—had started offering their customers color- and additive-free processed foods.
“We are aware of the recent publication from the University of Southampton on selected artificial colours, and we will continue to follow the guidance of regulators on this issue.”—Coca- Cola Great Britain. And in fact, on May 27, 2008, the story broke that Coca Cola was removing sodium benzoate from its products—but only in the U.K.
“Kraft Foods UK has no products aimed at children that contain the ingredients highlighted in the FSA [Southampton] study. . . . [W]ith our recent Lunchables reformulation in the UK, we reduced fat and salt, as well as removed artificial colours and flavours. Without compromising quality, taste and food safety, we will continue to see where we can make changes and still meet consumer expectations.”—Kraft Foods UK
“We know that artificial colours are of concern to consumers, which is why, in 2006, Mars began a programme to remove them from our products. . . in November 2007, Starburst Chews became free from all artificial colours. . . . in December 2007, Skittles were made free from all the artificial colours highlighted in a landmark study by Southampton University. . . We have already removed four colours mentioned in the Southampton study from Peanut and Choco M&M’s, and are in the process of removing the final one so they too will be free from these artificials during 2008.”—Mars UK
“Nestlé UK does not manufacture children’s products that contain any of the additives investigated by the FSA [Southampton] research. . . . and from September 2007, the UK’s favourite kids’ chocolate brand—Milky Bar—is to be made with all natural ingredients.”—Nestlé UK
“We are committed to replacing all artificial colours in our sweets. We note the Southampton University findings, but we had begun this process already because we are continually listening to our customers.” —UK Cadbury Chocolate division
Every time I read over those quotes, I find them absolutely stunning. Why are companies that operate in the U.K.—including our very own U.S. companies—so eager to take out the artificial colors there and so completely reluctant to do so here? Why are they willing to spend the money to reformulate their products there while refusing even to consider such a change-over here?
Maybe the answer can be found in a BBC report on Asda/U.K. Wal-Mart, “Explaining its decision to halt the use of artificial colours and flavours, Asda said it was acting because ‘mums and dads are becoming more and more concerned about what’s in the food they buy.’” An Asda/U.K. Wal-Mart press release elaborates: “Reformulation was hard work, but it was a labour of love.” Well, why can’t they perform that same labor of love over here? Is it too much to ask for what they have overseas?
After all, we’re not asking them to reinvent the wheel—they’ve already removed these ingredients from their products elsewhere. So why can’t our children get the same protection? Why can’t they serve up the same products to us?
Today it is estimated that 50% of Hispanic and African-American children will develop diabetes, that 1 in 90 boys has autism, and that 1 in 4 children has asthma. The Journal of Pediatrics reported that from 2002-2005, there was a 103% increase in diabetes medication for children, a 47% increase in asthma medication, a 41% increase in ADHD medication and a 15% increase in high cholesterol medicine.
And while the science may be disputed, depending on who is funding the study, as to whether commonly used food dyes such as Yellow 5, Red 40 and 6 others made from petroleum pose a “rainbow of risks” that include hyperactivity in children, cancer (in animal studies), and allergic reactions, because of the problem of hyperactivity, the Center for Science in the Public Interest petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to ban the use of these dyes given that the British government and European Unionhave taken actions that are virtually ending their use of dyes throughout Europe.
Is it too much to ask for the same value to be placed on the lives of the American kids in their cost-benefit analyses that has been placed on the lives of kids in the UK?
As a proud American, it seems to me that our duty as moms and dads and concerned citizens is pretty clear. We have to get this information out there so that our government and our corporations listen to us, the way that governments and corporations in Europe, Australia, the U.K., Japan, and other developed countries listen to their citizens.
Because while our children may only represent 30% of our population, they are 100% of our future.
Perhaps it’s time that we value them like our country depends on it.
To take action, please join the team at FRESH and sign their petition to the FDA:http://action.freshthemovie.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=6068
* * *
Thanks to Robyn for letting me repost this piece. Be sure to leave a comment below if you’d like to be eligible for the book drawing!
Allison Hyman says
Ugh, I really hope the US catches up soon. But really I fear/expect that it won’t because it’s all about money! So much lobbying and cross-contamination (ex. former CEO of a company serving on a government food committee) goes on that it’s almost impossible. Also, people don’t want to pay more for their food and they don’t know/don’t care what they eat so the consumer voice isn’t loud enough.
Bri says
Maybe that’s it, though — maybe the “increasing concern of mums and dads” was louder or more forceful or more well-coordinated in the UK than in the U.S. I hate to sound pessimistic, but I find that so many people I talk to — loving, kind parents and grandparents — just stare blankly when confronted with the potential risks of the stuff that’s in our food supply. They shrug it off and say that they’re sure it’s okay, in moderation — and even if they’re not really practicing moderation (or think they are, but aren’t reading labels closely enough to realize that this junk is in EVERYTHING), they refuse to admit it.
Let’s face it. Too many people are still on the wrong side of the fence when it comes to making informed decisions about food in the U.S.; and it’s become such a polarizing, politicized issue that somehow the whole idea of standing up for better food safety and regulation amounts to being called a “leftist,” a “liberal,” an “elitist,” or any number of other names (which I may not mind or take offense to…but many of my neighbors and fellow Americans would!). Until we stop making this a dividing line, and start treating it as merely a matter of public interest and concern that affects EVERYONE equally, maybe we won’t reach quite the groundswell of support for these measures that we need to achieve to make OUR corporations sit up and take notice.
Desiree F says
I saw this earlier today and reposted it on fb. I’d love to win one of Robyn O’Brien’s books to read more.
Jamie says
What Bri said.
Wow. I’m stunned into having little to say (this doesn’t happen often).
I will say that I’m grateful this is hitting the mainstream. The food dye issue was on Good Morning America this morning. My mom, who thinks I’m an over reactive food weirdo, said, “Oh wow Jamie. Didn’t you say you thought food dyes affect Pascal?” Yeah, Mom. A long time ago. Apparently Good Morning America makes it fact. Like Oprah.
carol Mirek says
I have been saying this about my son and especially the red 40, and my mother agrees, but my sister thinks I have 5 heads!! I am so glad it is on more of the major news streams. I share my info about it to all my fellow parents, and most of them look at me like I am crazy.
Christine says
Thanks for your efforts to get this information out there. I’ve been saying it for years and no one will listen…now that I can share a link, some people are starting to take notice.
Would love to read the book and share with my family and friends.
Kelly Lester says
Proud to be sharing all the this important information with my audience. As a concerned parent, I’d love to read this book and learn a lot more.
Meredith says
My son had a lot of medical issues as a young boy, including asthma, allergies, seizures, appendicitis, acid reflux…..w drs. never finding any explanations. Then my daughter suddenly started to have digestive issues when she started school, she is gluten intolerant. I did not have a whole lot of support and a lot of people thought I was a bit loony. To me it made perfect sense…its in the food. We switched to organic and whole real foods, I lost 100lbs, my husband 40 and my children healthy. It was hard and we did fall off a bit and the illnesses, fatigue and weight gain came back. Although we eat fairly healthy, we are making the much needed switch to organic whole real foods. As Jack Lalane said,”if God made it eat it, if he didnt , don’t.” It does make it hard on the wallet and the kids want to eat what all the other kids are eating. I can’t wait to share this article with my family, and show my kids, other COUNTRIES are making changes not just our family. Thanks for all this information.
KL says
Thank you both so much for continuing to speak up about this issue. It is mind-boggling that companies who are willing to reformulate their products elsewhere would continue to expect us to buy their crap ones. Please keep up the good work, and thanks for keeping us informed!
melissa brown says
I was noticing the difference in packaging between the US and UK products. The predominate image on the UK package is an actual strawberry, the bar is just one bar that looks like it’s been broken in two (suggesting a smaller serving) and the color on the box is muted compared to the US box. The US package has LOTS of strawberries and two complete bars (suggesting a larger serving) and the colors are more intense. And apparently we need easier packaging to open. 😉
Adrienne says
Great post. It nice to know there are so many other concerned and aware parents out there. Hopefully we can find a way to work together to make some of these changes! The book looks very interesting!
Elizabeth says
Wow, I am just stunned. I had no idea that all of these companies had already done the leg work to remove the artificial dyes from these foods. I sincerely hope they make the effort soon to start making changes in the US too.
Stephanie says
WOW! I feel paralyzed! I feel overwhelmed! I feel betrayed! I want to dump my milk down the drain and toss out all the rest! I want to move to Milan! (LOL!!) Kudos to the companies that changed for other countries for the better! Shame on the same companies for leaving the status quo at home!
Joy Helfrich says
I am so thankful that Robyn is on our side!
Jessica says
Good news: The products and formulations exist so that food manufacturers can make food without artificial ingredients in the US.
Bad news: Americans are too complacent in trusting their government to protect them. “If it’s already in my food supply, I’m sure it must be safe.”
KathieW says
First heard Robyn in an interview on The Kathleen Show. Then I borrowed her book from the library and read it cover to cover. Luckily we have no food allergies in my immediate family – no matter, her analysis of everything food is/was both shocking and enlightening. Many changed eating habits in my household!
carol Mirek says
Great article! Looking forward to following you on facebook and on your blog!
Amy says
It is so amazing to me just how little these big companies actually care about what anyone, especially children, is ingesting. This is a free country, so we are free to choose with our checkbooks, and my family does. But, what about all the other families who do not realize there is a potential problem? The FDA is billed as making sure food is safe, so I understand how many families just assume everything is safe if it is on the shelves.
Beth says
Thanks for this article. More information needs to be presented to the public that is not coming from food lobbyists, marketers, or directly from the big business themselves. Why do Americans continue to accept second best in the name of “independence” and “freedom?” It is obvious we have all been hoodwinked by the wealthy who continue to profit off our collective ignorance.
Joanne Roach says
I’m a UK reader and this was an interesting piece to read for me. It does seem that on a lot of these food issues the campaigning in the US is following about 4-5 years behind the trends over here – however it DOES seem to be following roughly the same trends, so I would not lose heart. It is definitely consumer demand which has driven the changes here, and a lot of that consumer demand is powered by television and media campaigns on the subject.
The other thing I would mention is that there is a political culture element to consider too. A lot of the restrictions placed on companies operating here are imposed by European Union legislation – the equivalent of federal legislation for you guys.
And the piece makes clear that the Southampton report was UK government supported, our government does intervene in more of these kinds of arenas. While we often grumble about it, and the ‘nanny state’ arguments do appear here, especially on the right, it seems to be nothing like the outrage I see in US media about any kind of centralised regulation there. I agree that the companies are ultimately responsible for the products they sell, and that consumers are responsible for buying (or refusing to buy) them, but the willingness to accept regulation versus ‘liberty’ arguments is another cultural factor which may be at play here.
mom said says
Such a great post, so important. It’s really too bad we didn’t get our labels from the FDA this past week but there was a huge media blitz bringing this issue into the forefront and raising awareness. We can all still do something everyday and that is refuse to purchase products with artificial color added.