On-Demand Supplier Webinar
Application note
Technical / white paper
High Intensity Sweeteners - Practical Guidelines
Brenntag
There is no known link between food colouring and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), however wider safety issues remain, says one expert.
A more comprehensive scientific answer to the effects of food colouring additives on children is needed, according to Dr Andrea Chronis-Tuscano, an associate professor of psychology and director of the University of Maryland ADHD Program. She said that debate over whether artificial food colours contribute to childhood ADHD “has itself been coloured for decades by weak science and strong emotional beliefs.”
She added that as one of the scientists testifying before a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) panel on the issue last year, she had no qualms “in debunking the alleged connection between these food additives and ADHD.”
Colours, kids and controversy
Controversy over the safety of artificial food colours has been raging for years, but reached a new frenzy in 2007 following the publication of a highly controversial study conducted by the University of Southampton in the UK suggesting a link between six food dyes – the ‘Southampton Six’ – and hyperactivity in children.
While EFSA concluded that the results could not be used as a basis for altering the acceptable daily intakes of the colours in question, the European Parliament baffled many observers by insisting that products featuring the colours should nevertheless include warning labels noting that they “may have an effect on activity and attention in children”.
However, the US FDA Food Advisory Committee recently voted against recommending European-style warning labels on products containing artificial food colours in the US.
Scientific basis
Chronis-Tuscano said that the testimony from other experts on the panel on the recent FDA panel ‘convinces’ her that more conclusive research on the overall safety of artificial colours is needed.
She said that all parents “should think twice” before exposing children to artificial colours, but added that parents of children with ADHD “should not be misled into thinking that artificial dyes are the cause of the condition.”
“As a University of Maryland clinical psychologist specializing in the assessment and treatment of this disorder, I told the FDA panel unequivocally that no convincing evidence supports the idea that food colour additives cause ADHD or that strict elimination diets effectively treat the condition. I stand by this assessment,” she said.
However, Chronis-Tuscano added that she has concerns regarding the overall safety of artificial colours, noting that the FDA committee experts “pointed out that appropriate toxicology studies have not been conducted to determine the effects of these additives on developing brains at different ages.”
“Given the lack of hard evidence, I am not convinced that food colouring additives are dangerous, but I am also not convinced that they are not. It is certainly possible that some small subset of children have a unique sensitivity to these substances.”
“The issue shouldn't end here. We need better answers about the effects of these additives,” she warned.
8 comments (Comments are now closed)
Bad Science
My child has ADHD and its not that colours cause it but they absolutely effect their behaviour in a very bad way. Those "so called" experts in science I would like to ask them who is paying them for their research. It is no wonder people dont trust scientific findings anymore.
Report abuse
Posted by Jb
16 June 2011 | 12h40
Not causal - but additive
While I agree somewhat with the Dr Chronis-Tuscano's sentiment that colours don't cause ADHD, I beleive, and the evidence suggests, that colours can both mimic and exacerbate the symptoms of ADHD and indeed other psychiatric and psychological conditions. I work with families who have food sensitivities and I have seen first hand the reactions to both colours added to the diet, and colours taken out (amongst a range of other substances). The argument isn't as black and white as some might make it out to be, and the jury is still out on the evidence base - but there is definitely a need for children to be kept away from these additives, at the very least until this research is completed so that we know they aren't having detrimental effects - colours aren't, weren't and haven't been tested for their effects on behaviour and/or attention proir to their approval for use. "First do no harm".
Report abuse
Posted by Karena
15 June 2011 | 23h50
Smoking GRAS
Jim, while these colors are Generally Recognized As Safe, keep in mind we're talking about sensitivities with an uncommon physical presentation. GRAS declaration just means that it's not toxic and won't kill you at the amount typically used.
There is a very, very big difference between sensitivity and toxicity, and I think you've confused an issue of sensitivity with toxicity (which is debatable itself as our definition of "toxic" is extremely narrow).
Report abuse
Posted by GRAS-shmash
15 June 2011 | 21h00
Are "Scientists" and "Doctors" arrogant?
To add to your point, Lee, those who truly understand "science" know its limitations. Those who don't understand are the ones who believe we are at the pinnacle of science.
Not to go off topic, but for example, many forms of tranditional medicine have an energetic component, some being completely based on energetics (like homeopathy).
Clinical studies show mixed results and many take this to mean therpaies are ineffective. However, we have to consider that maybe our "science" just isn't advanced enough to measure these types of healing paradigms.
I truly wish people would put "science" into context...that it's imperfect, and extremely primitive. Let's not make the mistake of thinking our science is all-knowing.
Report abuse
Posted by Doug
15 June 2011 | 20h37
Generally Recognized As Safe
These food colors are safe, they have been around for years and extensively tested...I would look more to the sugar in the icing and cake dough than the color itself.
Report abuse
Posted by Jim
15 June 2011 | 19h50
Artificial Food Coloring is not safe for children
My 7 yo old son is very sensitive to artificial colors. We always thought he was a high energy boy. We found out after putting him on an elimination diet for 4 weeks that his "energy" was coming from artificial colors. Within a week of starting the diet, I had a new child. He could actually sit and watch TV or read a book (a first). About 4 weeks into the diet, at a swim meet, his coach handed out ring pops at the end of the meet (9 pm). I let him have a small broken piece. By the next morning, he was bouncing and jumping all over our house. It lasted for about 12 - 16 hours. We saw the same reaction 2 more times over the past 6 mo. Now we don't allow artificial colors in our house. Quite a challenge when almost all children's medicine and anitibiotics is florescent orange or pink. When the FDA approved these artificial colors I don't think they had a clue how extensively these would be used in food marketed toward children. As these colorings are derived from coal tar, they all contain "allowable" amounts of lead, mercury and arsenic. What if a child is eating 5 - 10 of these products a day? They will more than surpass these allowable limits. These colorings are not food and are not meant to be ingested. European countries do not allow products with food colorings to be marketed to children. These products also contain warning signs that they may cause hyperactivity in children. This sounds like an important step in keeping our children safe.
Report abuse
Posted by Kris Albro
15 June 2011 | 18h55
Clinical Studies vs. Reality
I know for a FACT that my oldest son is sensitive as he becomes super hyper and attention drops to zero within hours of ingesting artificial colours (I think we're narrowed it to yellow). He doesn't even seem like the same kid at times. Off a single exposure, the effect can last for days before he's "normal" again.
We all know that clinical studies are NOT real life. As much as the scientific community would like to think that clinical studies are great, they don't reflect real life since day-to-day life isn't a super controlled setting like those in a study.
Stop using negative studies to debunk theories and look at the REAL evidence... REAL LIFE examples.
Report abuse
Posted by Lee
15 June 2011 | 18h27
Not Safe!
We are so myopic when looking at the issue of food colorings. It's not a direct cause/effect, but chemical of all sorts may certainly impact the nervous system. But the bottom line is that colorings are derived from coal tar or petroleum and contain known carcinogens. Even if they don't "hype" up kids, they may kill us in the long run.
Report abuse
Posted by Lori
15 June 2011 | 15h03
Read all comments (8)