California legislators want to enjoy a less artificial candy rainbow.
The state Assembly has passed legislation prohibiting the use of five chemical additives in food goods, including a coloring ingredient included in Skittles (thus the “taste the rainbow” tagline) and Red 3, which is found in packaged cookies, frostings, and other snacks.
Consumer advocates who support the law argue that these additives pose health hazards and should be eliminated. Candy producers argue that the safety of food additives should be determined by federal regulators rather than states.
The idea, called the “Skittles ban” by its opponents, has sparked a nationwide debate over these additives and how the bill, if passed, may change some cherished delicacies.
Both sides are bracing for a struggle in the California state Senate, where the bill will be debated next. Supporters object to the term “Skittles ban,” claiming that candy manufacturers have plenty of other coloring options. They point out that the five chemicals targeted by the California legislation are already widely prohibited in the European Union.
“If I thought this was going to ban Skittles, I would vote against it,” said Democratic Assemblyman Jesse Gabriel, who co-wrote the bill with fellow Democratic Assemblywoman Buffy Wicks. “I don’t think this will move a single product off the shelf.”
Candy makers have stated that they do not want to be subjected to state-by-state regulation of their ingredients.
“The California Assembly is well-intentioned, but this is not the right way to do it,” said Christopher Gindlesperger, senior vice president of public relations for the National Confectioners Association, which represents candy manufacturers, many of whom are concerned about the law.
Opponents of the bill argue that any necessary adjustments should be handled by the US Food and Drug Administration, which has lately received consumer petitions to ban the use of Red 3 and titanium dioxide, a coloring component found in Skittles.
“We shouldn’t put the cart before the horse,” said Republican state Assemblyman Vince Fong, who voted against the bill.
According to an FDA representative, the agency has assessed all five additives and is currently examining a petition filed in October by the Center for Science in the Public Interest and others to rescind Red 3’s approval for use in food.
Consumer advocates claim the FDA hasn’t studied some of these chemicals since the 1970s and hasn’t followed through on comments it made in 1992 suggesting it would ban the use of Red 3 in food.
“This regulatory process at FDA is so broken that states are now stepping into the breach,” said Scott Faber, the Environmental Working Group’s government affairs director, referring to the California measure.
According to an FDA representative, the agency has continued to follow scientific advances concerning the safety of Red 3. “While the FDA recognizes that the regulatory history of [Red 3] is complex, we can confirm that the FDA has evaluated the safety of all of the substances that are included in the California state bill.”
In the federal register in 1992, the FDA stated that it “believes it must take action to revoke the permanently listed uses of the color additive.”
According to the International Association of Color Manufacturers, research has progressed and the effects on rats fed high dosages of color additives may not be the same in people, especially in this case. Aside from Red 3, the bill, which was approved by the California Assembly on a 54-12 vote, would prohibit the use of titanium dioxide, potassium bromate, brominated vegetable oil, and propyl paraben in food products.
Mars, the maker of Skittles, stated in 2016 that it intends to eliminate artificial colors from all of its human food, but that plan was shelved in 2021 after it was discovered that many consumers were unconcerned about them. Mars stated that it would continue to eliminate them in Europe.
In the United States, Skittles are produced with titanium dioxide, which is used to improve color and lengthen shelf life.
“We always follow local regulatory rules, and all of our treats and snacks are made to the very highest quality and adhere to strict safety standards,” a Mars representative wrote in an email.
Consumer organizations claim that because California is such a large market, candy companies would implement any needed ingredient modifications uniformly. A food-industry official stated that reformulating products would cost time and resources, which would be difficult for smaller businesses.
Companies’ judgments, according to Frederick Stearns, a partner at the law firm Keller and Heckman who specializes in FDA concerns, will likely be impacted by how easy it is to find comparable substitutes for these additives.
“We don’t generally see companies marketing separate versions of products for California and then for the rest of the country,” he said. Companies are typically afraid to change famous, well-known food recipes, he continued.
General Mills, for example, reintroduced Trix cereal with artificial colors after consumers complained about an all-natural version.
Many of these components have already been phased out by some companies. Panera Bread, for example, stated in 2014 that it will eliminate artificial preservatives, sweeteners, flavors, and colors. According to a business spokeswoman, Panera took them out by the end of 2016, including all five chemicals targeted by the California bill.
