(GoRealNewsNow.com) – The Food Drug Administration (FDA)’s late plan to ban food coloring Red Dye No. 3 has sparked controversy and worry among consumers.
Red Dye No. 3, found in nearly 3,000 food products including popular snacks and candies, is suddenly under fire despite its long history of use in American households.
Jim Jones, a deputy commissioner for the FDA, stated, “With Red 3, we have a petition in front of us to revoke the authorization board, and we’re hopeful that in the next few weeks we’ll be acting on that petition.”
The timing of this potential ban is particularly troubling. As Democrat congressman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-NJ) pointed out:
“With the holiday season in full swing where sweet treats are abundant, it is frightening that this chemical remains hidden in these foods that we and our children are eating.”
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a voice of reason in this debate, criticized the FDA’s nutrition departments for overstepping their bounds.
“There are some departments such as the nutrition departments in the FDA that have to go, that are not doing their job, they are not protecting our kids,” RFK said.
This move against Red Dye No. 3 seems to be another example of government agencies expanding their power at the expense of consumer choice and business freedom.
The FDA’s crusade against Red Dye No. 3 is based on shoddy evidence. While some studies suggested potential health concerns, the FDA itself has previously deemed the dye safe when used according to guidelines.
Furthermore, this potential ban highlights the growing disconnect between American regulators and the rest of the world.
Even though the U.S. considers banning Red Dye No. 3, other countries have long used it without issue.
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health adjunct professor Jerold Mande, a former senior adviser for the FDA and former deputy undersecretary for food safety in the Agriculture Department said:
“There is something called the precautionary principle, which is basically the thought that it’s better to be safe than sorry.”
The so-called “precautionary principle” cited by some experts is a slippery slope that could lead to the banning of countless other ingredients and products.
As the FDA reviews the safety of these dyes with public comments open until January 2025, one has to consider if the government is overstepping its bounds.
The initiative might seem protective, but it edges closer to unnecessary regulation in the name of health, when natural food alternatives can replace these dyes, encouraging personal responsibility and informed choice.
Copyright 2024, GoRealNewsNow.com
