The FDA Is Replacing Synthetic Food Dyes, and These 3 Just Got the Green Light
The FDA approved three new natural food color additives — galdieria extract, butterfly pea flower extract, and calcium phosphate — to replace synthetic petroleum-based dyes.
This move follows Health Secretary Robert Kennedy Jr.'s April announcement to phase out synthetic dyes like Red 40 and Yellow 5, with a national standard and timeline coming soon.
Industry leaders warn the transition may lead to higher food prices and limited product availability due to the complexity and cost of reformulating with natural colors.In late April, Robert Kennedy Jr., the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, announced plans to phase out petroleum-based artificial colors from the nation's food supply. That includes Red 3 and 40, Blue 1 and 2, Yellow 5 and 6, and Green 3, all of which are used in thousands of products found on grocery store shelves.
Though Kennedy didn't provide extensive details on how his department plans to completely phase out dyes, a press release from his department stated that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) will establish a "national standard and timeline for the food industry to transition from petrochemical-based dyes to natural alternatives." And now, it seems it's making good on at least part of that promise.
On May 9, the FDA issued a release stating it had approved three new color additive petitions to "expand the palette of available colors from natural sources" that manufacturers can use.'Today we take a major step to Make America Healthy Again,' Kennedy shared in the release. "For too long, our food system has relied on synthetic, petroleum-based dyes that offer no nutritional value and pose unnecessary health risks. We're removing these dyes and approving safe, natural alternatives—to protect families and support healthier choices.'
Martin A. Makary, the commissioner of the FDA, added that his staff has been "moving quickly to expedite the publication of these decisions, underscoring our serious intent to transition away from petroleum-based dyes in the food supply and provide new colors from natural sources.'
Specifically, the FDA approved the use of galdieria extract blue, a blue color derived from the "unicellular red algae Galdieria sulphuraria." It is now approved for use in a wide range of products, including nonalcoholic beverages, beverage bases like fruit drinks and smoothies, breakfast cereal coatings, hard candy, flavored frostings, ice cream, yogurt, and liquid creamers.
Related: Are Natural Food Dyes Better? Experts Weigh In on the Pros and Cons
Then there's butterfly pea flower extract, another blue color that can be used to "achieve a range of shades including bright blues, intense purple, and natural greens," the statement shared. The FDA noted that it's already approved for use in products such as sports drinks, alcoholic beverages, dairy drinks, and ready-to-drink teas, but now it can also be used in ready-to-eat cereals, crackers, snack mixes, hard pretzels, and chips.
Finally, the FDA approved calcium phosphate, which is a white compound that can now be used in ready-to-eat chicken products, white candy melts, doughnut sugar, and sugar for coated candies.Galdieria Extract (Blue): A bright blue dye derived from Galdieria sulphuraria, a unicellular red algae. The FDA has approved it for use in a wide range of products, including nonalcoholic beverages, cereals, hard candy, frostings, ice cream, yogurt, and creamers.
Butterfly Pea Flower Extract (Blue to Purple): A natural colorant extracted from the butterfly pea flower that produces a deep blue hue. It is pH-sensitive, turning purple or pink in acidic environments, which allows it to create a range of shades depending on the food or drink it's used in. The FDA expanded its approved uses to include snacks like chips, crackers, pretzels, and cereals.
Calcium Phosphate (White): A naturally occurring mineral used to create a white color in food products. The FDA approved it for use in ready-to-eat chicken products, doughnut sugar, sugar for coated candies, and white candy melts.The announcement noted that "once the FDA approves a color additive petition, any manufacturer can use the coloring for the approved uses," which means you could see butterfly pea flower in your favorite candy one day. However, "one day" is the key term. As the International Association of Color Manufacturers said in a statement in April following Kennedy's announcement, the process of switching color formulations is "neither simple nor immediate, and the resulting supply disruptions will limit access to familiar, affordable grocery items."
Furthermore, Amy Agallar, vice president of investor relations and treasurer at Sensient, shared with CNN that all of your favorite, colorful treats could get more expensive as a result of these decisions.
'Natural colors can be more expensive from a cost-in-use perspective depending on the raw ingredient being used," Agallar said. 'The raw ingredients can vary due to many factors such as availability, time to harvest, and color availability from the raw material. The natural color needed to replace a synthetic color can be ten times that of a synthetic product.'
Read the original article on Food & Wine
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
39 minutes ago
- Associated Press
IBN Coverage: NRx Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: NRXP) Files ANDA for Preservative-Free IV Ketamine
IBN published this article, a multifaceted communications organization engaged in connecting public companies to the investment community. LOS ANGELES, CA - June 5, 2025 ( NEWMEDIAWIRE ) - NRx Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: NRXP), has submitted an Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) to the FDA for NRX-100, its preservative-free intravenous ketamine formulation aimed at approved indications such as anesthesia and pain management. With the U.S. ketamine market valued at $750 million and global demand projected to reach $3.35 billion by 2034, the company is seeking priority review amid an ongoing national shortage. NRx also plans to petition the FDA to mandate preservative-free ketamine formulations, citing safety concerns over benzethonium chloride. This filing complements its broader strategy to expand ketamine's label to include treatment for suicidal depression, backed by clinical data from more than 1,000 patients. To view the full press release, visit About NRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. NRx Pharmaceuticals is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developing therapeutics based on its NMDA platform for the treatment of central nervous system disorders, specifically suicidal bipolar depression, chronic pain, and PTSD. The Company is developing NRX-101, an FDA-designated investigational Breakthrough Therapy for suicidal treatment-resistant bipolar depression and chronic pain. NRx plans to file an NDA for Accelerated Approval for NRX-101 in patients with bipolar depression and suicidality or akathisia. NRX-101 additionally has potential to act as a non-opioid treatment for chronic pain, as well as a treatment for complicated UTI. NRx has recently initiated a New Drug Application filing for NRX-100 (IV ketamine) for the treatment of suicidal depression, based on results of well-controlled clinical trials conducted under the auspices of the US National Institutes of Health and newly obtained data from French health authorities, licensed under a data sharing agreement. NRx was awarded Fast Track Designation for development of ketamine (NRX-100) by the US FDA as part of a protocol to treat patients with acute suicidality. NOTE TO INVESTORS: IBN is a multifaceted financial news, content creation and publishing company utilized by both public and private companies to optimize investor awareness and recognition. For more information, please visit Please see full terms of use and disclaimers on the InvestorBrandNetwork website applicable to all content provided by IBN, wherever published or re-published: The latest news and updates relating to NRXP are available in the company's newsroom at Forward Looking Statements Certain statements in this article are forward-looking, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements and may not be indicative of future results. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including, among others, various factors beyond management's control, including the risks set forth under the heading 'Risk Factors' discussed under the caption 'Item 1A. Risk Factors' in Part I of the Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K or any updates discussed under the caption 'Item 1A. Risk Factors' in Part II of the Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and in the Company's other filings with the SEC. Undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking statements in this article in making an investment decision, which are based on information available to us on the date hereof. All parties undertake no duty to update this information unless required by law. About IBN IBN is a cutting-edge communications and digital engagement platform providing tailored Platform Solutions for select private and public companies. Over the course of 19+ years, IBN has introduced over 70 investor facing brands to the investment public and amassed a collective audience of millions of social media followers. These distinctive investor brands amplify recognition and reach as well as help fulfill the unique needs of our rapidly growing and diverse base of client-partners. IBN will continue to expand our branded network of influential properties as well as leverage the energy and experience of our team of professionals to best serve our clients. IBN's Platform Solutions provide access to: (1) our Dynamic Brand Portfolio (DBP) through 70+ investor facing brands; (2) article and editorial syndication to 5,000+ news outlets; (3) full-scale distribution to a growing Social Media Network (SMN) ; (4) a network of wire solutions via InvestorWire to effectively reach target markets and demographics; (5) Press Release Enhancement to ensure accuracy and impact; (6) a full array of corporate communications solutions; and (7) total news coverage solutions. For more information, please visit Please see full terms of use and disclaimers on the InvestorBrandNetwork website applicable to all content provided by IBN, wherever published or re-published: Media Contact IBN Los Angeles, California 310.299.1717 Office [email protected] View the original release on
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food
Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of "medical freedom," the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion. It's an idea supported under Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices. On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn't prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents. MORE: CDC official who oversaw COVID vaccine recommendations resigns "I'm a freedom-of-choice person," Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. "We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don't want it, the government shouldn't force them to do it." Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy's talk about "freedom of choice." Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups. Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride. The public health experts said Kennedy's actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health. "I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it's the solutions that are problematic," Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. "What you're seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It's this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that's always been true." He went on, "We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, 'Follow your own science.' As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we're losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health." Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination. Shortly after Trump's election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that "if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information." MORE: CDC official who oversaw COVID vaccine recommendations resigns During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that "makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines." Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides "community immunity" but also called the decision to vaccinate a "personal one." However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC's immunization schedule for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." The CDC's immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy's announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model -- allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor. "Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. "We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice." "If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice," Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. "Those two things are antithetical. You can't do both. You can't say you're allowing choice if you're restricting access." Ferrari said the idea of "medical freedom" is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals. "If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to -- and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access -- preventive medicine," he said. "It's sort of easy to say, 'Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community." Traditionally, the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. Spencer said Kennedy's bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people. "This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he's going to let people make a decision," Spencer said. Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps -- provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- to buy candy and soda. "It's nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September. MORE: RFK Jr. to tell medical schools to teach nutrition or lose federal funding At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks. "The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care," Nixon said in a statement. "That's not freedom -- it's failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn't an attack on choice -- it's the first step in restoring it." Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan. However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place. "In terms of limiting people's choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone's life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment," Petersen said. "A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we're thinking about reducing people's access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that." One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said. Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets. She added that the nation's dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods. "All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It's really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful," Petersen said. "People can have small indulgences, but really, we're interested in what is their pattern over a period of time." Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said. A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP. One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective. "Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that's making the dollar go further, and it's kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger," Petersen said. "A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that's going to have the greatest benefit here." ABC News' Youri Benadjaoud and Cheyenne Haslett contributed to this report. RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food originally appeared on
an hour ago
RFK Jr. has promoted 'freedom of choice' while limiting vaccines, food
Prior to becoming Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had espoused the idea of "medical freedom," the ability of people to make personal health decisions for themselves and their families without corporate or government coercion. It's an idea supported under Kennedy's Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement to reduce the prevalence of chronic disease in the U.S. by making healthier lifestyle choices. On topics, such as vaccines, Kennedy has said he wouldn't prevent children from being able to receive vaccines but would leave the choice up to parents. "I'm a freedom-of-choice person," Kennedy told Fox News host Sean Hannity during an interview in March. "We should have transparency. We should have informed choice, and if people don't want it, the government shouldn't force them to do it." Some public health experts told ABC News, however, that the HHS has been limiting choices on some products for many Americans despite Kennedy's talk about "freedom of choice." Just last week, Kennedy announced the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention would no longer recommend the COVID-19 vaccine for certain groups. Additionally, Kennedy has called on states to ban recipients of food stamps from being able to use them to purchase soda. He has also praised states for banning fluoride from public drinking water and indicated he will change federal guidance on recommending adding fluoride. The public health experts said Kennedy's actions are setting up a dichotomy on public health. "I think that RFK Jr. has done a really good job of identifying some of the problems [in public health], but it's the solutions that are problematic," Dr. Craig Spencer, an associate professor of the practice of health services, policy and practice at Brown University School of Public Health, told ABC News. "What you're seeing with RFK Jr. and his approach to health is an individualization of public health. It's this idea that you can make decisions for your health, and that's always been true." He went on, "We need to be able to follow their guidance, not just have them tell us, 'Follow your own science.' As the focus shifts from community to individuals, we're losing a lot of that underpinning, which has led to a lot of the gains in public health." Limiting access to COVID-19 vaccines Kennedy has repeatedly stated that he is not anti-vaccine and that he supports vaccination. Shortly after Trump's election, Kennedy said in an interview with NBC News that "if vaccines are working for somebody, I'm not going to take them away. People ought to have choice, and that choice ought to be informed by the best information." During his confirmation hearings, Kennedy said he supported the childhood vaccination schedule and that he would not do anything as head of HHS that "makes it difficult or discourages people from taking vaccines." Separately, in an opinion piece Kennedy wrote for Fox News in March on the nationwide measles outbreak, he said the measles vaccine helps protect individuals and provides "community immunity" but also called the decision to vaccinate a "personal one." However, last week, Kennedy announced the removal of the COVID-19 vaccine from the CDC's immunization schedule for "healthy children and healthy pregnant women." The CDC's immunization schedule is not just a guide for doctors but also determines insurance coverage for most major private plans and Medicaid expansion programs. Following Kennedy's announcement, the schedule was updated noting all children would be eligible for COVID vaccines, but now under a shared-clinical decision-making model -- allowing parents to choose whether their children are vaccinated alongside advice from a doctor. "Regarding the vaccines, HHS is restoring the doctor-patient relationship," HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon told ABC News in a statement. "We are encouraging those groups to consult with their health care provider to help them make an informed decision. This is freedom of choice." "If you restrict access, you necessarily restrict choice," Dr. Matthew Ferrari, a professor of biology and director of the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News. "Those two things are antithetical. You can't do both. You can't say you're allowing choice if you're restricting access." Ferrari said the idea of "medical freedom" is catchy, but public health recommendations are made based on how to protect the most vulnerable individuals. "If you look at the outcomes, if you look at the consequences of that movement, it has been to disproportionately restrict access to -- and restrict support and infrastructure to allow people to access -- preventive medicine," he said. "It's sort of easy to say, 'Well, take the vaccine away. But [vaccines] prevent a future outcome of illness for yourself and for others in the community." Traditionally, the CDC's Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices decides if there is a benefit to a yearly vaccine and who should get it. The independent advisory committee then makes recommendations to the CDC, which has the final say. The committee was set to meet in late June to vote on potential changes to COVID vaccine recommendations. Spencer said Kennedy's bypassing of traditional avenues when it comes to changing vaccine recommendations is also taking away choice from people. "This did not go through the normal process that it should have, and he basically just made a decision for people while at the same time saying that he's going to let people make a decision," Spencer said. Restricting foods under SNAP Kennedy has also campaigned to prevent Americans from using food stamps -- provided under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program -- to buy candy and soda. "It's nonsensical for U.S. taxpayers to spend tens of billions of dollars subsidizing junk that harms the health of low-income Americans," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece for The Wall Street Journal last September. At a MAHA event in late May, Kennedy said the governors of 10 states have submitted waivers to the United States Department of Agriculture requesting permission to ban SNAP recipients from using benefits to buy candy and soft drinks. "The U.S. government spends over $4 trillion a year on health care," Nixon said in a statement. "That's not freedom -- it's failure. Secretary Kennedy is unapologetically taking action to reverse the chronic disease epidemic, not subsidize it with taxpayer dollars. Warning Americans about the dangers of ultra-processed food isn't an attack on choice -- it's the first step in restoring it." Nutrition experts agree that sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) are unhealthy. Frequent consumption of SSBs is linked to health issues such as weight gain, obesity, type 2 diabetes, tooth decay, heart disease and kidney diseases, according to the CDC. Kristina Petersen, an associate professor in the department of nutritional sciences at Pennsylvania State University, told ABC News there is a crisis of diet-related diseases in the U.S., which increase the risk of disability and reduces lifespan. However, she said there needs to be strong evidence of the benefits of restrictive policies if they are to be put in place. "In terms of limiting people's choices, it is important to consider all the different roles that food plays in someone's life, and so obviously we want people eating nutritious foods, but also we need to acknowledge that food is a source of enjoyment," Petersen said. "A lot of social situations revolve around food. So, when we're thinking about reducing people's access to given foods, we need to think about the consequences of that." One unintended consequence could be an eligible family not signing up for SNAP benefits because of the restrictions, she said. Even if a ban on buying candy and soda with SNAP benefits does occur, Petersen said she is not aware of any evidence that shows banning certain foods leads to healthier diets. She added that the nation's dietary guidelines are written to emphasize healthy foods like fruits and vegetable rather than telling people to avoid or restrict less healthy foods. "All foods can be consumed as part of a healthy dietary pattern. It's really just the amount and the frequency that determines whether that pattern is helpful overall or less helpful," Petersen said. "People can have small indulgences, but really, we're interested in what is their pattern over a period of time." Providing incentives for purchasing healthier foods may be more effective and still allow people to have choice, Petersen said. A 2018 study used a model simulation to study the effects of food incentives, disincentives or restrictions in SNAP. One of the simulations involving incentives for foods such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grains, fish and plant-based oils found to have the most substantial health benefits and be the most cost-effective. "Things like fruits and vegetables, they do tend to be more expensive, so if you incentivize them by providing more benefits … that's making the dollar go further, and it's kind of making the economic piece of this a bit stronger," Petersen said. "A lot of this is framed around personal choice. Rather than restricting access to, how can we give people more access to healthy foods? I think that's going to have the greatest benefit here."
