Food safety advocates are celebrating the announcement from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that it will ban the use of Red No. 3, a synthetic dye commonly used to give food and beverages their vibrant cherry-red hue. The ban, set to take effect in 2027, marks a significant victory for public health, especially since Red No. 3 has long been a subject of concern due to its potential carcinogenic effects.
The dye, which has been used for over a century, was first banned in cosmetics in 1990 after studies showed that high doses could cause cancer in rats. However, it continued to be used in food products until recent years, even as it was banned in Europe and several other countries due to growing safety concerns. California led the charge in 2023, becoming the first U.S. state to pass a law prohibiting Red No. 3 from products sold within its borders. This state-level initiative helped spur the FDA’s move toward a national ban.
The transition away from Red No. 3 is expected to be smooth, according to food safety experts. Many food manufacturers that sell products globally have already reformulated their recipes to exclude the dye. As a result, they have existing alternatives ready for the U.S. market, which should minimize disruptions.
Peter Lurie, president of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy organization, highlighted that companies have had ample time to prepare for the ban and reformulate their recipes. Lurie and other health advocates have argued that the ban is long overdue, given the known risks associated with Red No. 3 and the availability of safer alternatives.
One of the key points in the debate is that many of the same multinational companies already comply with the bans in Europe, where Red No. 3 has been prohibited since 1994 (except in cocktail cherries). These companies have successfully substituted the dye with safer, natural alternatives like beet juice and pomegranate juice. While these natural options are often perceived as more costly, advocates, including California Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, argue that the costs are negligible and in some cases, even cheaper than synthetic dyes.
The FDA’s decision to ban Red No. 3 also reflects broader concerns over the safety of food additives. While some industry groups, such as the International Association of Color Manufacturers, maintain that the dye is safe for consumption, the FDA’s stance is clear: any additive found to cause cancer in animals or humans cannot be authorized for use in food. The agency’s decision aligns with global food safety standards and reflects increasing consumer demand for healthier, more transparent food products.
Food manufacturers, including Ferrara, maker of Brach’s candy corn, have already begun the process of eliminating Red No. 3 from their products. Ferrara, which started phasing out the dye in 2023, is on track to complete the transition by the end of 2026. Other companies, like Just Born, the maker of Peeps, have already removed Red No. 3 from their products.
The transition away from artificial dyes may not only improve public health but could also set a precedent for future regulatory changes. As consumers become more aware of the ingredients in their food, the demand for cleaner, more natural products is likely to increase, prompting further reformulations in the food industry.
In the end, the ban on Red No. 3 is a step forward in the ongoing effort to make food safer for everyone. While there may be some initial concerns about potential price increases or supply chain disruptions, advocates are confident that the change will be manageable. The goal is simple: to ensure that the food we eat is not only delicious but also free from harmful ingredients. With many companies already on board, it seems that a smooth and successful transition is on the horizon.
