A cancer-inducing synthetic food dye was just banned in the United States and it’s a matter of time before it’s forbidden in Canada, a food expert says.
Erythrosine, which is commonly known as Red No. 3, is a synthetic food dye that gives some foods and drinks an attractive, cherry-red colour. It’s commonly found in food colouring for candy, desserts, and icings, as well as in cosmetics, hair dyes and some medications.
However, as of last week, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has banned the use of the dye, citing that the ingredient could cause cancer. Though there was no evidence shown that it induces the disease in humans, concerns were raised following an observation that male laboratory rats were getting cancer after being exposed to high levels of the additive.
While the FDA has taken action, Health Canada continues to approve the use of Red No. 3. With growing concerns over the potential health risks of the synthetic additive, what could this mean for the future of the dye in Canada?
WHY RED DYE NO. 3 IS STILL ALLOWED IN CANADA
Sylvain Charlebois, a Canadian professor and expert in food distribution, says that while red dye is permitted, there are in fact strict limitations to its use in Canada.
He suggests that cost may be a factor in Canada’s reluctance to scrap the dye, which he says is much cheaper as opposed to using plant-based alternatives.
“The other ingredient you could actually use that is being used is beet juice,” Charlebois explained to Now Toronto, adding that the paleness of Kellogg’s cereal Froot Loops, for example, in comparison to its bright-coloured U.S. counterpart is much paler because of its use of the natural extract.
“But beet juice is more expensive, and so that’s why I think manufacturers have been reluctant to do anything.”
He also says the real challenge lies within manufacturing, where Canadian companies that import products with Red No. 3 into the U.S. will be forced to change their products to eliminate the additive by Jan. 15, 2027. Charlebois predicts Canada may eventually also take the steps to begin phasing out the dye if companies begin to remake the exports anyway.
“They’re basically asking the industry to phase that out by January 2027, which is, in my view, an appropriate timeline,” Charlebois said.
“I think it’s likely going to be a challenge for manufacturers in Canada, because if you’re exporting to the U.S., you got to reformulate for the U.S. And so, if you’re reformulating for the U.S., why not for Canada? It’s the question of time before we see Canada do the exact same thing.”
Charlebois points at the U.S.’s new health administration being led by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a controversial figure in the medical industry known for his anti-vaccination stance, and predicts that Canada may begin to follow suit with the health agenda of its southern neighbours.
“I do think that the push in the U.S. to make America healthy again is likely going to impact how things work here in Canada, because we’re incredibly integrated with the U.S.,” he said.
“And so I do think that there are going to be other ingredients, like maybe on the radar for the FDA, and, of course, de facto for Health Canada.”
Charlebois encourages consumers to be informed by checking product labels for synthetic dyes and doing research on ingredients they might not understand.
“Just read labels, and you’ll find out that some ingredients don’t make sense, or you don’t understand what they are,” he urged.
“I think it’s actually going to really impact how regulators approve or not approve certain ingredients.”
