Originally published June 29, 2023 8:00 pm PDT
In a pioneering move, the state of California is set to enact legislation that would ban five food additives implicated in various health problems, such as hormone disruption and cancer.
The ban targets common ingredients in candies and processed foods, including red dye No. 3, titanium dioxide, brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, and Propylparaben.
This ambitious measure, known as Assembly Bill 418, is on track to be implemented by 2025, following its passing by the California State Assembly in May.
Despite this promising development, significant opposition looms, particularly from major food industry groups, The Defender reports.
Among the bill’s detractors are the American Bakers Association, the California Grocers Association, and the International Association of Color Manufacturers.
Despite such resistance, the bill enjoys robust support from health and consumer safety organizations.
This groundbreaking bill was also known colloquially as the “Skittles Bill,” named after the popular candy, as well as other sweets such as Hot Tamales and Sour Patch Kids, all of which contain the banned substances.
The bill is now in the hands of the California Senate Committee on Health, where a decision on its further progress is due to be taken.
In defense of the bill, Brian Ronholm, Director of Food Policy at Consumer Reports, stated, “I think [the California bill] demonstrates that FDA is not doing its job.”
He elaborated, “They don’t have the ability to go back and re-review some of these additives that have been approved in the past, so therefore they haven’t looked at these in many years.”
There are hopes that, if passed, this bill could catalyze national efforts to re-evaluate harmful food additives and expel those that pose a risk to public health.
Similar bills have already been proposed in New York and a federal bill, the Food Chemical Reassessment Act, was reintroduced by Illinois Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky.
An FDA spokesperson pushed back on the criticism, stating, “All the substances in California Bill 418 have been evaluated by the FDA.”
They added, “When we identify new data and information that indicates the use of an ingredient is unsafe, we take steps to protect public health, which can include revoking authorizations or approvals for certain uses, working with industry on voluntary market phase-out agreements and recalls, issuing alerts and informing consumers.”
Despite vocal opposition from industry groups, proponents of the bill argue that the five substances targeted are not essential to food production.
Independent consultant and food additives researcher, Maricel Maffini, opined, “I don’t see any of the chemicals that are in the California bill as essential for food uses.”
Maffini added that some of these chemicals, such as nano-scale titanium dioxide particles, can accumulate in the body over time, thus calling into question the reliability of previous toxicity studies.
The bill’s passage is not guaranteed, however, with resistance coming from key industry groups who insist that the state is overstepping its bounds.
The industry claims that the bill “usurps the comprehensive food safety and approval system for these five additives and predetermines ongoing evaluations.”
Christopher Gindlesperger, Senior Vice President of Public Affairs & Communications at the National Confectioners Association, argued, “The California assembly is well-intentioned, but this is not the right way to do it. We should be relying on the science-based rigor of the federal regulatory process — and avoiding a state-by-state patchwork approach related to food additives and ingredients.”
Although the road to enactment is challenging, the bill represents a significant step toward tighter control of food additives in the United States.
Its success or failure may set the tone for similar legislation across the country.
