Artificial food dyes: what the evidence says

What they are

In the US, FDA splits food colours into two groups. Certified colours are made synthetically, today mainly from petroleum or coal raw materials. They are called ‘FD&C’ colours (Food, Drug & Cosmetic) because they can also be used in drugs and cosmetics, and FDA’s food page lists seven, such as FD&C Yellow No. 6^[7]. Colours exempt from certification generally come from vegetable, mineral or animal sources, for example annatto, dehydrated beets and grape skin extract^[7].

In the UK and EU the same colours carry E-numbers. The six with a warning label, for example, are sunset yellow (E 110), quinoline yellow (E 104), carmoisine (E 122), allura red (E 129), tartrazine (E 102) and Ponceau 4R (E 124)^[2].

The Southampton study and the EU warning

McCann and colleagues (University of Southampton, 2007) ran a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial in 153 three-year-olds and 144 eight- and nine-year-olds. The drinks contained the preservative sodium benzoate and one of two colour mixes, or a placebo. Mix A raised a global hyperactivity score in the three-year-olds (effect size 0.20, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.39), and in the older children both mixes had an adverse effect when the analysis was limited to those who drank at least 85% of the drinks^[1]. The authors concluded that artificial colours or sodium benzoate, or both, increased hyperactivity in children in the general population^[1].

The effects were small, and the design tested mixtures, so it cannot say which colour, or whether the preservative, did it. EFSA, the EU food-safety regulator, later lowered the acceptable daily intake for three of the six colours but said the available data, including the Southampton study, did not establish a causal link between individual colours and behavioural effects^[3].

The EU response was a labelling rule rather than a ban. Foods containing any of the six colours above must state the colour’s name or E-number followed by ‘may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children’^[2].

California’s review

California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) reviewed the research on synthetic dyes and children’s attention and activity, and published it in 2022. It found 27 clinical trials, 25 of them challenge studies. Sixteen of those 25 (64%) found some evidence of a positive association, and 13 (52%) found a statistically significant one^[4].

OEHHA also concluded that FDA’s acceptable daily intakes rest on older studies not designed to detect behavioural effects, and that for four dyes with enough dose data the basis of the ADI ‘may not be adequate to protect neurobehavior in susceptible children’. It called for children’s exposure to be re-evaluated^[4]. That is a call for more research and a reassessment, not proof that ordinary intakes harm every child.

Where US regulation stands

• Red No. 3 is revoked. On 15 January 2025 FDA revoked its authorisation under the Delaney Clause, which bars any additive found to induce cancer in humans or animals. The trigger was a 2022 petition citing cancer in male rats at high exposure through a rat-specific hormonal mechanism. FDA says that mechanism does not occur in humans and that claims of risk to people are not supported by the available science. Manufacturers have until 15 January 2027 for food and 18 January 2028 for ingested drugs^[5].
• The other dyes are a voluntary phase-out. In April 2025 HHS and FDA announced a plan to phase out petroleum-based dyes. FDA’s tracker, current as of 15 September 2026, says it is working with industry to eliminate six remaining certified colours (Green No. 3, Red No. 40, Yellow No. 5, Yellow No. 6, Blue No. 1 and Blue No. 2) by the end of 2027. Orange B’s authorisation has been revoked, and revoking Citrus Red No. 2 has been proposed^[6].
• Company pledges are tracked. FDA lists commitments from manufacturers and retailers with target dates, several marked ‘in progress’^[6]. These are pledges, not legal limits, so check the product rather than the headline.

Rules change quickly here, so treat this section as a snapshot and check FDA’s tracker for the current position.

Natural alternatives

Plant colours are what manufacturers are turning to. FDA lists turmeric (E 100) as permanently listed and exempt from certification for foods generally^[10], and dehydrated beets as a certification-exempt colour^[7]. FDA approved a beetroot red additive and expanded the use of spirulina extract in February 2026, but its status pages record that the effective date was delayed while objections were evaluated, so check whether those have taken effect^[8][9]. The tracker also lists other newly approved natural options: calcium phosphate, Galdieria extract blue, gardenia blue and butterfly pea flower extract^[6].

Our entries cover two of them as ingredients: turmeric and spirulina. Those entries are about taking them as supplements, which is a different question from the trace amounts used as a colour. We have no entry for beetroot yet.

‘Natural’ is not a safety rating. FDA says certified and exempt colours must meet the same safety standard before approval^[7]. See Why ‘natural’ does not mean safe.

How to read a label

1. Look in the ingredients list, not the front of the pack. FDA’s regulations specify how each colour is declared on the label^[7]. In the US, names beginning ‘FD&C’ are the certified synthetic colours^[7].
2. In the UK and EU, look for the warning sentence. Any of the six colours listed above brings the ‘may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children’ text, with the colour named^[2]. The other E-numbers do not carry it.
3. Read ‘no artificial colors’ carefully. In February 2026 FDA said companies may use the claim when products contain no petroleum-based colours, which means a product coloured with a plant-derived colour can now carry it^[6]. The claim says nothing else about the product.
4. Remember the preservative. The Southampton drinks also contained sodium benzoate, so the study cannot separate it from the colours^[1].

Reviewed by Healthy and Herbal editors · 1 October 2026 · Next review April 2027