California lawmakers have voted to ban food additives that are linked to behavioral issues in children. Popular snacks like Flamin’ Hot Cheetos and Twinkies will be banned from sale in school cafeterias nationwide. However, stores can still sell these products under the first-of-its-kind California School Food Safety Act. Here’s what this law means, which additives are banned, and why they might be dangerous for children
The first law of its kind
California has already become the first state to ban the use of four potentially harmful food and beverage additives linked to a range of diseases, including cancer. These include brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, propylparaben, and Red 3 dye. These additives can be found in candies, fruit juices, cookies, and are already banned in dozens of countries. Governor Gavin Newsom signed this bill last year, but it will not take effect until 2027, giving manufacturers time to reformulate their recipes.
On Thursday, August 29, lawmakers voted to ban California schools from serving food additives used in Flamin’ Hot Cheetos, Twinkies, Doritos, Froot Loops, Fruity Pebbles, Jolly Ranchers, and others. These additives include food dyes Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, as well as titanium dioxide.
Proponents of the bill argue that this step is necessary to limit the consumption of dyes that are linked to worsening behavioral problems in children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
“California has a responsibility to protect our students from chemicals that harm children and interfere with their ability to learn,” said Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, the bill’s author, in a statement. “As a lawmaker, a parent, and someone who struggled with ADHD, I find it unacceptable that we allow schools to serve foods with additives that are linked to hyperactivity and neurobehavioral harms.”
Governor Gavin Newsom has yet to sign the first such proposal in the country. However, based on last year’s bill, nothing is likely to stop him from doing so, despite industry criticism.
“It’s unfortunate that scientifically proven, safe ingredients have been demonized for the purpose of advancing a political agenda,” said John Hewitt of the Consumer Brands Association. “The passage of this bill could cost schools and families money, limit choice and access, and create consumer confusion.”
Responding to conservative criticism, Newsom even included a packet of Skittles in his message last year. These candies were produced in Europe, where companies modified their recipes after the European Union banned the dye that gives Skittles their color.
“This is demonstrable proof that the food industry is capable of maintaining product lines while complying with different public health laws, country-to-country,” Democrat Newsom wrote when signing the bill.
Do food dyes really harm children?
In his statement, Gabriel references a 2021 report by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA), which states that consuming food dyes can trigger or worsen hyperactivity and other behavioral problems in children.
Additionally, according to a 2012 National Institutes of Health study, Red 3 was found to cause cancer in animals, while Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6 contain carcinogens like benzidine, which can increase the risk of cancer.
Despite the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approving these additives and dyes, critics are increasingly calling on the agency to reconsider its decisions regarding certain substances.
Some parents concerned about the health effects of artificial dyes have directly contacted snack manufacturers, prompting companies to take action. In 2013, Kraft Foods announced that it would remove artificial dyes from its macaroni and cheese, replacing them with paprika, annatto, and turmeric.
According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), titanium dioxide, which is also targeted by the bill, provides a “smooth surface” and shine to food products and has been used for over half a century. In 2022, it was banned by the European Commission, which stated that it could not rule out the health risks of titanium dioxide. It also expressed concerns about its “genotoxicity” — the ability of the additive to cause DNA or chromosomal damage.
Opponents and supporters’ opinions
However, some food manufacturers argue that decisions to remove additives from the market should be made by the FDA, not legislators.
“These activists are dismantling our national food safety system state by state in an emotionally-driven campaign that lacks scientific backing. The only institution in America that can stop this sensationalistic agenda that is not based on facts and science is the FDA,” said Christopher Gindlesperger, spokesperson for the National Confectioners Association.
California’s State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond stated that the bill sets new standards for school meals. “Healthy, safe school meals are foundational to our students’ well-being and ability to learn. As someone who depended on school meals growing up, I know how critical it is that our children receive food at school that is nutritious and is never harmful,” Thurmond said in his statement. “AB 2316 is an important step forward to ensure that California’s schools are healthy and equitable learning environments for all.”
Supporters of such bans also suggest that manufacturers could simply adjust their recipes to comply with the new regulations, allowing consumers to continue enjoying their favorite snacks.
The bill, which is now headed to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk, does not ban specific foods but targets six substances linked to behavioral problems in children. It will take effect on December 31, 2027.
