Citrus Red 2: Should This Azo Dye Still Be FDA-Approved?
Health Secretary Kennedy Jr. has indicated that he will review the synthetic colorings authorized by the FDA. Citrus Red 2 is not among the colorings cited.
Citrus Red 2 (CR2) is a coloring agent authorized by the FDA for use exclusively on orange peel at a maximum dose of 2 ppm.
This coloring is not authorized in the EU.
CR2 is a synthetic azo dye used to color orange peel and modify its appearance for consumers who associate the color of the fruit's peel with its degree of ripeness.
JECFA has not been able to establish an ADI for CR2 and recommends against using this substance as a food additive.
IARC has classified this substance in Group 2B due to its carcinogenic activity in rats and mice.
In the EU, the use of this dye could be classified as food fraud, as is already the case with the use of carbon monoxide in tuna.
Should the FDA review this dye?
Plenty of toxic things are 'natural.'
Somehow a large segment of the population is less afraid of natural things we know are toxic than synthetic things they don't understand the properties of. This is one of the main reasons I backed out of biotech, putting up with some mind bending ignorance and paranoia.
Modifying a product to make it look fresher than it is is illegal in the USA. So coloring an orange peel even with 'natural' dyes is illegal. Similar red plastic wrap can't be used to wrap hamburger, etc.
The USA as does any other country has the right to review any item. Reputable science should then be used to determine the safety of the product.
Like G M said - some of the most deadliest chemicals on earth are natural. So natural doesn't mean safe as many people think.
I think citrus red 2 is a FDA legal dye today.
What is Citrus Red 2? A Look at This Food Dye and Potential Health Issues
Health Secretary Kennedy Jr. has indicated that he will review the synthetic colorings authorized by the FDA. Citrus Red 2 is not among the colorings cited.
Citrus Red 2 (CR2) is a coloring agent authorized by the FDA for use exclusively on orange peel at a maximum dose of 2 ppm.
....
Should the FDA review this dye?
Second point, should the FDA review? IMO, absolutely. I've said before I'm tired of food labels in the US reading like science experiments. I buy bread made with salt, flour and water, no added dihipothalomous-xenoblahblahblah that turns it into a spongy mess.
But by your own link OP, Citrus Red 2 is not authorized by the FDA as an ingredient, only as a colorant on citrus peels. So comparing it to the RFK ban on synthetic colorings in ingredients is kinda comparing apples to oranges. :shades:
Citrus Red is scheduled for review.
The entire FDA is being rewritten.
I expect Citrus Red and about 100+ other nasties to be banned/discontinued.
There is some really cool stuff coming for Americans
I used to have the view of "meh" with moving to natural colours but it is a move which started about two decades ago in the UK.
I'd suggest with this ingredient, if it's still widely used which it seems like there may be doubt about, then it's serving no purpose. It's not a case of "natural colour vs artificial" here, it's "do we need the colour at all?" I'm sure producers have for years got away with stating "ah the peel is thrown away" forgetting that in "zumo" type juicers and home juicers the juice comes into heavy contact with skin and cooks often use orange peel.
I cannot see any argument against "this serves no purpose, why is it here?"
When it comes to ingredients actually in food, I agree that it shouldn't be assumed that all natural dyes will be harm free, especially when they need to be used in higher concentrations, so step one should be to remove dyes where they serve no purpose, then reduce, then replace.
On a side topic, I've been trying to reduce the amounts of high fat, sugar and salt foods in my diet (HFSS). What I find fascinating is thinking about the kind of foods they are. They're often UPFs as well (but that's an even bigger rabbit hole in my view) but take the packaging off and sweets (candies) aside, all are brown or beige or would be if they weren't artificially coloured. (Honestly, I'm getting to the point.) In evolutionary terms we associate bright colours with freshness, ripeness and sweet. That's why we colour food whether it's with artificial or natural colours. To then start colouring natural food feels sacrilegious but that aside, why are we colouring beige food which isn't good for us to make it look more appealing?
Whenever I wander around Spanish or Italian food markets on my frequent trips over there, I'm always struck by how the tomatoes don't look perfect. Some may have tiny green patches, be too big or too small etc. The food looks real, delicious and still sells. Why does US food (and to a degree British) have to look like mock perfection rather than the natural product it is? And why are we trying to push people to eat foods which aren't good for them? Perhaps all colourings should go. Soft drinks will only then have colour from whatever juices are within. Sweets / candies will look the colour of the sugars and gums which comprise them. If we went for only white or transparent packaging as well, those brown and beige "treats" may not look so enticing...
:secret: Orange zest is in my Christmas cake recipe so it should definitely be banned! :sleazy:
Plenty of toxic things are 'natural.'
Somehow a large segment of the population is less afraid of natural things we know are toxic than synthetic things they don't understand the properties of. This is one of the main reasons I backed out of biotech, putting up with some mind bending ignorance and paranoia.