For 35 years, you couldn’t put Red Dye No. 3 in lipstick.
You could put it in your kid’s gummies.
That is not a typo. That is how American food regulation has worked since 1990. The FDA banned the dye in cosmetics — because it caused cancer in lab animals — and left it in candy, cereal, fruit cocktail, gummy vitamins, and almost every food marketed to children. For thirty-five years.
In January 2025, they finally got around to fixing it.
Your lips were protected before your kids were. Sit with that for a minute.
The 35-Year Lag
Artificial food dyes — Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 3 — are made from petroleum. They were originally synthesized from coal tar. Most are still made from petrochemical building blocks today. They serve no nutritional purpose. They exist for one reason: to make food look more appealing to children.
In 2007, The Lancet published the Southampton Study (McCann et al., 2007). A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial — the gold standard. The finding: artificial dyes plus sodium benzoate caused increased hyperactivity in children. Not “may have been associated with.” Caused.
The U.K. acted. The EU followed. By 2010, European law required warning labels on foods containing those dyes. Manufacturers reformulated to avoid the labels. The same Skittles you can buy in London contain natural colorings. The ones you buy in Phoenix do not.
The American response? More committees. More advisory documents. Three more decades of letting the dyes sit in the food supply at concentrations that, in some studies, were associated with measurable behavioral changes in sensitive children. Researchers like Bernard Weiss at the University of Rochester had been raising the alarm since the 1980s (Weiss, 2012). The Center for Science in the Public Interest petitioned the FDA repeatedly. Nothing.
Meanwhile, the same companies that swore up and down that the dyes were perfectly safe were quietly making the European versions of their products without the dyes. Because they had to. Not because they thought it was right.
In 2024, California passed the California School Food Safety Act, banning six artificial dyes from school food (California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2021; California School Food Safety Act, 2024). Several states followed. The federal Red 3 ban came in January 2025.
It only took 35 years.
What “Phasing Out” Actually Means (Three Options)
Brand reformulation announcements are good news. They also need to be read with one eye open. There are three things “phase-out” can mean. Only one of them is what consumers think it means.
Option 1: Removal. The dye comes out, no replacement, the product just looks less artificially bright. This is rare.
Option 2: Replacement with natural sources. Beet juice. Paprika extract. Turmeric. Spirulina. Carmine — which is, by the way, a pigment made from crushed cochineal insects. The product is genuinely cleaner. The substitute may have its own considerations.
Option 3: Rebranding without changing. Some “natural” formulations turn out to be highly processed extracts that retain the same regulatory and health questions, just under a different name. “Natural color” on a label can mean almost anything.
When Kraft Heinz, General Mills, or Mars announces a “phase-out,” the right question isn’t whether. It’s which option, which products, and in which countries. The answers are not always the same.
The Names to Watch
If you’re reading labels yourself, here’s what to scan for:
- Red 40 — the most common artificial dye in the U.S. food supply. It’s everywhere.
- Yellow 5 (also called tartrazine)
- Yellow 6
- Blue 1
- Blue 2
- Green 3
- Red 3 — federally banned in food as of January 2025. Should not appear on new labels.
Anytime you see “FD&C [Color] No. [Number]” — that is an artificial dye. The phrase “color added” without specifics is a red flag. “Natural color” is better but still warrants a closer look.
The simplest rule is the simplest rule. Real food doesn’t need to advertise its color. Strawberries are red. Carrots are orange. Spinach is green. When packaged food needs help looking like food, that is worth a question.
What This Moment Actually Tells Us
The dye phase-out is not the story. The phase-out is the symptom.
The story is that for thirty-five years, multiple major food companies insisted the dyes were perfectly safe — while making the European versions of their products without them. They knew. They have always known. They just had no economic reason to act in the U.S. market until the regulatory and consumer pressure forced their hand.
That is not malice. That is incentive structure. They will keep operating that way until consumers change the math.
The way you change it: read labels, scan barcodes, vote with your cart.
Want to see if those dyes are in your kitchen right now?
Use the Rock The New Food Pyramid scanner to check every packaged product on your shelves. The Dirty 25 lookup at RockTheNewFoodPyramid.com will flag every artificial dye in your pantry — and suggest cleaner swaps in seconds.
Real food. Real labels. Real change.
References
California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2021). Health effects assessment: Potential neurobehavioral effects of synthetic food dyes in children. California Environmental Protection Agency.
California School Food Safety Act, Assembly Bill 2316. (2024). California Legislature.
Center for Science in the Public Interest. (2010). Food dyes: A rainbow of risks. CSPI Reports.
McCann, D., Barrett, A., Cooper, A., Crumpler, D., Dalen, L., Grimshaw, K., Kitchin, E., Lok, K., Porteous, L., Prince, E., Sonuga-Barke, E., Warner, J. O., & Stevenson, J. (2007). Food additives and hyperactive behaviour in 3-year-old and 8/9-year-old children in the community: A randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. The Lancet, 370(9598), 1560–1567.
Stevenson, J., Sonuga-Barke, E., McCann, D., Grimshaw, K., Parker, K. M., Rose-Zerilli, M. J., Holloway, J. W., & Warner, J. O. (2010). The role of histamine degradation gene polymorphisms in moderating the effects of food additives on children’s ADHD symptoms. American Journal of Psychiatry, 167(9), 1108–1115.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2025, January). Final rule: Color additive petitions: Removal of FD&C Red No. 3 from food and ingested drugs. Federal Register.
Weiss, B. (2012). Synthetic food colors and neurobehavioral hazards: The view from environmental health research. Environmental Health Perspectives, 120(1), 1–5.