By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Synthetic food dyes commonly added to candy, beverages, cereals and other processed foods can contribute to hyperactivity and other behavioral problems in some children, according to a California government assessment that questioned whether federal safety standards adequately protect children’s neurological health.
The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) released its findings on April 16, 2021, following a two-year scientific investigation commissioned by state lawmakers.
Researchers examined human clinical trials, animal experiments and other scientific literature involving seven synthetic food dyes that were permitted for use in the United States when the assessment was conducted.
The review concluded that certain children are particularly sensitive to artificial color additives, with exposure potentially contributing to inattentiveness, hyperactivity, restlessness and other changes in behavior.
“Evidence shows that synthetic food dyes are associated with adverse neurobehavioral outcomes in some children,” said OEHHA Director Dr. Lauren Zeise. “With increasing numbers of U.S. children diagnosed with behavioral disorders, this assessment can inform efforts to protect children from exposures that may exacerbate behavioral problems.”
The assessment examined FD&C Blue No. 1, Blue No. 2, Green No. 3, Red No. 3, Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5 and Yellow No. 6, which were among the most commonly consumed synthetic food colorings.
These petroleum-derived additives are used to enhance the appearance of various foods, beverages, medications and vitamin supplements.
According to the agency’s complete scientific assessment, researchers evaluated clinical studies in which children initially consumed diets without synthetic dyes and were subsequently given foods or beverages containing artificial color additives.
Their behavior was then assessed using standardized measurements, allowing researchers to identify changes potentially associated with dye consumption.
The findings indicated that some children exhibited noticeable behavioral changes following exposure, while others experienced little or no measurable effect.
The researchers concluded that individual sensitivity varies substantially and that exposure to synthetic dyes may aggravate existing behavioral difficulties in susceptible children.
Animal studies provided additional evidence of possible neurological effects, including changes in activity levels, memory, learning and brain chemistry.
Some experiments also identified alterations in neurotransmitters, which help nerve cells communicate, and microscopic changes in brain structures.
However, the strength of the evidence differed among studies, and the review did not establish that food dyes cause attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or explain the broader increase in diagnoses.
California lawmakers requested the assessment partly because of concerns about rising rates of childhood behavioral disorders.
The agency reported that the percentage of American children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD had increased from approximately 6.1% to 10.2% over two decades.
Those figures provided context for the investigation but did not demonstrate that artificial colorings were responsible for the increase.
A major finding concerned the federal government’s acceptable daily intake limits for synthetic food dyes.
OEHHA determined that the safety thresholds established by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration relied largely on studies conducted 35 to 70 years earlier.
Many of those investigations were designed to assess conventional toxicological effects rather than subtle changes in children’s attention, activity levels or neurological development.
California researchers concluded that newer scientific findings could support substantially lower intake limits for certain color additives.
The agency warned that existing federal thresholds might not provide adequate protection against behavioral effects in sensitive children.
Researchers also examined how much artificial coloring Americans consume, collaborating with scientists from the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of California, Davis.
The exposure assessment considered dietary patterns among children of different ages, as well as pregnant women and women of childbearing age.
Scientists found that children frequently consume multiple artificial dyes during a single day, with some of the highest exposures associated with juice drinks, soft drinks and other brightly colored products.
The assessment also identified certain food-related exposures to Red No. 3 that could exceed the federal acceptable daily intake level in effect at the time.
Researchers concluded that commonly observed exposure levels for some synthetic dyes could exceed revised safety benchmarks if those benchmarks incorporated more recent neurological research.
The review process began in 2018, when the California Legislature provided funding for an evaluation of potential neurological and behavioral effects.
OEHHA invited scientists and members of the public to submit relevant research, convened a scientific symposium in September 2019 and released a draft assessment in August 2020.
The draft underwent public review and independent scientific peer review before the final report was published in April 2021.
The findings contributed to broader discussions about artificial food colorings, ingredient disclosures and whether federal regulations should be updated to reflect modern research.
The FDA had previously acknowledged that some children could be sensitive to artificial color additives, although the agency’s earlier assessment concluded that most children did not experience adverse behavioral effects from their consumption.
Scientific disagreement has also persisted over the size and consistency of the observed effects. Some studies have found associations with behavioral symptoms, particularly in parent-reported assessments, while others have not demonstrated significant changes.
California’s review nevertheless concluded that the overall evidence supported concern about the effects of synthetic dyes on susceptible children.
The assessment did not establish that every child experiences adverse effects from artificial food coloring, nor did it conclude that all synthetic dyes carry identical risks.
Instead, it identified a potential gap between traditional food additive safety testing and newer research examining childhood neurological and behavioral development.
The report provided California policymakers and federal regulators with scientific findings relevant to future food safety decisions, particularly those involving children’s exposure to artificial color additives and the adequacy of existing intake standards.
Original article
Comments