By JAMIE STENGLE and JONEL ALECCIA
Dallas (AP) According to a new Texas law supporting the Trump administration’s “Make America Healthy Again” policy, items like chips and candy that contain dyes and ingredients that are prohibited in other nations must now bear warning labels for the first time.
Related Articles
-
What s in and out of Trump s big bill as Senate races to meet Fourth of July deadline
-
Royal upgrade: Trump will stay at the Dutch king s palace during his NATO visit
-
Court orders Trump administration to facilitate another deported man s return from El Salvador
-
Early US intelligence report suggests US strikes only set back Iran s nuclear program by months
-
Trump administration authorizes $30 million for Israeli-backed group distributing food in Gaza
Although an analysis of the legislation reveals that it also misrepresents the status of several substances that would trigger the action, it might have significant implications on the country’s food supply.
In Australia, Canada, the European Union, and the United Kingdom, foods prepared with any of the more than 40 dyes or additives must have labels stating that they contain components not advised for human consumption beginning in 2027, according to a law signed by Republican Governor Greg Abbott on Sunday. However, a research reveals that around a dozen of the targeted chemicals are already limited in the United States or approved in the cited regions.
Although the law’s goal is admirable, a consumer advocacy group warned that it may result in inaccurate citations and possible legal challenges, leaving the food industry frantically trying to respond.
Thomas Galligan, a scientist with the Center for Science in the Public Interest, stated, “I don’t know how the list of chemicals was constructed.” For a warning to be legal, it must be accurate.
The statute, which received broad bipartisan support, is one of many comparable pieces of legislation that GOP-led statehouses have passed this year as lawmakers support the Make America Healthy Again program of U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In an effort to alter American diets, Texas would be the first state in the US to employ warning labels to focus on additives rather than nutrients like sugar or saturated fat.
Food producers will have to choose whether to remove specific products off Texas shelves, add the new required language, reformulate products to circumvent the labeling, or challenge the measure in court.
How the list of additives was compiled is unknown. The office of Republican state senator Lois Kolkhorst, the bill’s author, did not immediately respond to inquiries.
When it comes to food additives, regulators in Australia, Canada, the EU, and the UK are cautious. If a product’s safety is questionable, it may be prohibited or subject to restrictions until it is proven to be safe. In contrast, the United States often permits items to be sold unless there is an obvious risk of harm.
Red Dye No. 4, Red Dye No. 3, and other additives targeted by Texas partially hydrogenated oils are either prohibited or unapproved by U.S. regulators for use in food.
Galligan and officials of the Consumer Brands Association, a trade association for the food industry, pointed out that several of the other components on the list are permitted in all four of those zones.
Blue dye No. 1 and No. 2, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), diacetyl, interesterified soybean oil, lactylated fatty acid esters of glycerol and propylene glycol, and potassium aluminum sulfate are a few examples.
Melanie Benesh, an analyst with the Environmental Working Group, an environmental group that focuses on harmful chemicals, added that the legislation had regulatory gaps that would make it impossible for some compounds to be labeled at all.
The Texas list, for instance, includes the food additive azodicarbonamide, or ADA, which is used as a bleaching agent in cereal flours. However, under the Federal Code of Regulations, it can be used in food under specific circumstances without risk. According to Benesh, the ADA is probably exempt from the state labeling legislation because of that federal regulation.
According to Benesh, the measure may not ultimately have the effect that lawmakers had hoped for.
Even though it’s still unclear how much processed food contributes to chronic health condition, nutritionists have long been concerned about the possible negative health impacts of food additives.
Requiring warnings on food labels can help customers make healthier decisions and encourage the industry to eliminate additives that are causing problems, according to research. Front-of-package labeling that would indicate saturated fat, sugar, and sodium levels have been proposed by the US Food and Drug Administration.
According to Brian Ronholm, director of food policy for Consumer Reports, this is a significant victory for consumers in Texas and in general. States’ reluctance to wait for federal action is reflected in this.
Additionally, the bill strengthens the requirements for physical education and nutrition curricula in public and charter schools, establishes a state nutrition advisory group, and mandates nutrition courses for continuing education for medical professionals and college students.
A number of states have begun acting to limit food chemicals and dyes.
Due to health concerns, California was the first state to outlaw certain chemicals and dyes used in candy, beverages, and other foods in 2023. Last year, the state went one step further and banned a number of other dyes from being used in food that was provided in public schools.
Other legislation enacted this year includes one in Arkansas that prohibits the use of two specific additives in food that is produced or sold there, and a Sevendyes are prohibited statewide under West Virginia law.
According to an Associated Press study using the bill-tracking program Plural, lawmakers in a number of states have passed legislation this year prohibiting specific additives from food sold or served in public schools. This includes Texas, where a bill prohibiting the serving of specific foods in school lunches was signed by the governor last month.
According to Christina Roberto, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s Center for Food and Nutrition Policy, “it’s a pretty dizzying time to be watching what’s happening because typically policies that are not very industry friendly are opposed, particularly in red states,” In some respects, the MAHA movement and RFK have completely upended everything.
Kennedy and FDA Commissioner Marty Makary have urged industry to take voluntary steps and made a commitment to eliminate artificial colors from foods at the government level. A few major food producers have complied.
Health groups have long demanded that artificial food coloring be banned, pointing to conflicting research showing that certain children may develop neurobehavioral disorders, such as hyperactivity and attention problems.
The FDA has previously said that the permitted dyes are safe and that the majority of children do not experience any negative consequences from eating foods that include color additives, according to the body of scientific evidence.
Aleccia from Temecula, California, provided contributions to this study. Writer David A. Lieb of the Associated Press covered the story from Jefferson City, Missouri.
The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Department of Science Education of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute provide support to the Associated Press Health and Science Department. All content is entirely the AP’s responsibility.
