Kellogg says it will remove artificial dyes from cereals by the end of 2027
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said Wednesday that Kellogg had signed an agreement assuring his office that the Michigan-based company would 'permanently remove toxic dyes" from its cereals by the end of 2027.
Paxton launched an investigation earlier this year into whether Kellogg violated state consumer protection laws by continuing to use blue, red, yellow, green, and orange artificial dyes. Around the same time, U.S. health officials said that they would urge foodmakers to voluntarily work toward removing petroleum-based colors.
Both Kellogg and General Mills, another major U.S. cereal maker, said they would. General Mills later joined Kraft Heinz, Nestle, Smuckers and some other food manufacturers in announcing target dates for making all their products without artificial dyes.
But Paxton's office said Kellogg was the first to sign a 'legally binding' agreement. 'Following months of investigating and negotiating, I'm proud to officially say Kellogg's will stop putting these unhealthy ingredients in its cereals,' the attorney general said in a statement.
Details about the terms of the agreement Kellogg signed, which is legally known as an assurance of voluntary compliance, were not immediately clear. The company did not comment on it directly when reached by The Associated Press on Thursday but said it appreciates 'the opportunity to work collaboratively with the Texas AG's office and share their focus on health and wellness.'
Kellogg also pointed to its earlier commitment to phase out FD&C dyes, which are synthetic additives that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved for use in food, drugs and cosmetics. It said it already planned to stop launching new products with the dyes in January.
'We have announced we are reformulating our cereals served in schools to not include FD&C colors by the 2026-27 school year,' Kellogg said in an emailed statement Thursday. By the end of 2027, 'we will completely remove FD&C colors from the small percentage of our foods that contain them today.'
According to Kellogg's website, 85% of the cereal the company sells contains no FD&C colors — and none of its products have included Red No. 3 for years. Federal regulators banned that dye from food in January.
Synthetic dyes have long been used to make brightly colored cereals, drinks, candies, baked goods and even products like cough syrup. But health advocates have called for the removal of artificial dyes from foods, citing mixed studies indicating they can cause neurobehavioral problems, including hyperactivity and attention issues, in some children.
The FDA has maintained that its currently approved dyes are safe and that 'the totality of scientific evidence shows that most children have no adverse effects when consuming foods containing color additives.'
Pressure on the food industry has increased since Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an outspoken critic of such synthetic additives, became President Donald Trump 's health secretary.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
a minute ago
- Reuters
US sues California to block tough emissions standards for trucks
Aug 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. government said on Friday it sued Californiato stop the state from enforcing stringent emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks that President Donald Trump recently declared void. In complaints filed this week in two federal courts, the U.S. Department of Justice said federal law preempts the California Air Resources Board from enforcing various emissions rules governing heavy-duty trucks and engines. These include the Clean Truck Partnership, a 2023 initiative with manufacturers designed to advance California's goal of lowering emissions, while giving the truckmaking industry flexibility to meet emissions requirements. The Justice Department sued after a House of Representatives committee said it recently learned that staff at the California Air Resources Board won't let auto manufacturers bring vehicles to market unless they comply with California's preempted standards. "This ongoing defiance of federal law must stop," the department said. California's rules governing light-duty vehicles are also preempted, the department added. The California Air Resources Board declined to comment, while the office of California's Governor Gavin Newsom did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Newsom, a Democrat, has long promoted tough emission standards, as well as the sale of electric vehicles, to help fight climate change. California has long had power under the federal Clean Air Act to set tighter pollution limits than federal law requires, and received more than 100 waivers under that law since 1970. But the Justice Department said the Republican Trump's signing in June of congressional resolutions curbs California's power, including by voiding a waiver allowing the Clean Truck Partnership. "President Donald Trump and Congress have invalidated the Clean Air Act waivers that were the basis for California's actions," said Adam Gustafson, acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department's environment and natural resources division. "CARB must respect the democratic process." The new lawsuits are intended to help Trump end California's push for electric vehicles, level the regulatory playing field and promote consumer choice, the department added. Both lawsuits were filed as motions to intervene in existing federal cases challenging California's emissions standards, including the Clean Truck Partnership. One case was filed on Monday in Sacramento, California by four large truck makers--Daimler ( opens new tab, International Motors ( opens new tab, Paccar and Volvo ( opens new tab. The other was filed in December in Rockford, Illinois by the American Free Enterprise Chamber of Commerce.
Reuters
a minute ago
- Reuters
Russian energy export disruptions since start of Ukraine war
Aug 15 (Reuters) - When U.S. President Donald Trump meets Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, one of his bargaining chips to encourage Putin to make progress toward a ceasefire in Ukraine will be to ease U.S. sanctions on Russia's energy industry and exports. Trump has also threatened tougher sanctions if there is no progress. Here is how sanctions have impacted Russian energy exports since the start of the conflict. Russia was the top supplier of natural gas to Europe before the war. Most gas travelled through four pipeline routes: Nord Stream running under the Baltic Sea, the Yamal line crossing Poland, transit via Ukraine, and the Turkstream line. Europe also imports Russian liquefied natural gas (LNG). In 2021, total Russian gas imports to the EU totalled 150 billion cubic metres (bcm) per year, or 45% of its total imports, and have fallen to 52 bcm or 19% since, according to the European Commission. While the EU has not imposed sanctions on Russian pipeline gas imports, contract disputes and damage to Nord Stream caused by an explosion, have cut supplies. As part of a fresh round of sanctions announced in July, the European Union has now banned transactions including any provision of goods or services related to Nord Stream, which albeit damaged could be revived as a gas supply route. Transit via Ukraine ended at the end of 2024, leaving just Turkstream as a functioning route for Russian pipeline gas to Europe. The European Commission has also proposed a legally binding ban on EU imports of Russian gas and LNG by the end of 2027, but this has not been passed into legislation yet. The U.S. in 2024 imposed sanctions on companies supporting the development of Russia's Arctic LNG 2 project, which would become Russia's largest plant with an eventual output of 19.8 million metric tons per year. The U.S., UK, and EU all prohibited the import of seaborne crude oil and refined petroleum products from Russia during the first year of the war in Ukraine. In addition to the embargoes, the G7 group of countries (including the US, UK, and EU) imposed a price cap on Russian seaborne crude oil for third countries at $60 per barrel in December 2022, and a cap on fuels the following February. The EU and UK altered the crude price cap level in June 2025 to $47.60, or 15% below the average market price, but the U.S. did not back the move. The price cap aims to reduce Russia's revenues from oil sales by prohibiting shipping, insurance and reinsurance companies from handling tankers carrying crude traded above the cap level. Western powers have also imposed sanctions on more than 440 tankers belonging to the so-called shadow fleet that transports sanctioned oil outside of Western services and the price cap. Russia's leading shipper Sovcomflot is also under sanctions in the West. The U.S. has also sanctioned major Russian oil companies including Gazprom Neft ( opens new tab and Surgutneftegaz ( opens new tab. The measures banning Russian oil imports in the west and restricting Russian oil trade elsewhere have redirected Russian oil flows towards Asia, with China, India, and Turkey emerging as the major buyers for Russian crude. The price cap was meant to keep Russian oil flowing to prevent a spike in global oil prices which would have followed a halt or severe drop in Russian exports. Trump has, however, signalled a change in policy in recent weeks by threatening to impose secondary sanctions on India and China for buying Russian oil to put pressure on Putin to agree to a ceasefire in Ukraine. The European Union banned imports of Russian coal in 2022, seeing volumes drop from 50 million metric tonnes in 2021 to zero by 2023, according to data from Eurostat.
Reuters
a minute ago
- Reuters
Democrats decry move by Pentagon to pause $800 million in nearly done software projects
WASHINGTON, Aug 15 (Reuters) - Democrats took aim at the Trump administration after Reuters reported on Wednesday that the Navy and Air Force were poised to cancel nearly completed software projects worth over $800 million. The reason for the move was an effort by some officials at the services to steer new projects to companies like Salesforce (CRM.N), opens new tab and Palantir (PLTR.O), opens new tab, in what could amount to a costly do-over. 'The Pentagon has yet to show that it had a good reason for halting these contracts in the last inning and scrapping work American tax dollars have already paid for," Democratic Senator Tim Kaine said in an emailed statement. "If it can't show its homework, then this announcement - just days after Palantir's CEO spoke at Mike Johnson's Wyoming donor retreat - reeks of corruption.' Punchbowl reported earlier this month that Palantir CEO Alex Karp planned to address Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson's annual big-donor retreat in Jackson Hole, Wyoming. The Pentagon and Air Force did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Navy declined to comment. Trump officials say the administration is striving to make the contracting process more efficient. Trump took office vowing to rid the government of what he calls waste and abuse. The website of the Department of Government Efficiency, the agency he created to spearhead those efforts, lists over $14 billion in Defense Department contracts it claims to have canceled. But seven months into his presidency, some of his own actions have complicated DOGE's work, from firing the Pentagon's inspector general to issuing an executive order prioritizing speed and risk-taking in defense acquisitions. 'If you're serious about cracking down on waste, fraud, and abuse, the last thing you'd do is cancel $800 million in projects that are nearly ready to roll out just to turn around and steer the same work to corporations of your choosing," said Democratic Representative Maggie Goodlander, who sits on the House Armed Services Committee and served as an intelligence officer in the United States Navy Reserve for over a decade. "This maneuver is an insult to taxpayers and servicemembers across America," she added. Salud Carbajal, another House Democrat who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, said the behavior was part of a pattern of waste at the Pentagon under Trump. 'I understand that our military's acquisition and procurement processes aren't flawless, but this administration has repeatedly shown a blatant disregard for the responsible use of taxpayer dollars,' said Carbajal. 'From lavish military parades to unnecessary troop deployments in Los Angeles, President Trump has used our armed forces to inflate his own ego and enrich his allies," he said, adding that he would continue to call out mismanagement and press for accountability.
