New Fears Over Additives in Children’s Food
Food safety experts have advised parents to eliminate a series of additives from their children’s diet while they await the publication of a new study that is understood to link these ingredients to behaviour problems in youngsters.
The latest scientific research into the effect of food additives on children’s behaviour is thought to raise fresh doubts about the safety of controversial food colourings and a preservative widely used in sweets, drinks and processed foods in the UK. But the Guardian has learned that it will be several months before the results are published, despite the importance of the findings for children’s health.
Researchers at Southampton University have tested combinations of synthetic colourings and preservative that an average child might consume in a day to measure what effect they had on behaviour. A source at the university told the food industry’s magazine the Grocer last week that their results supported findings first made seven years ago that linked the additives to behavioural problems, such as temper tantrums, poor concentration and hyperactivity, and to allergic reactions.
Both studies were conducted for the Food Standards Agency.
The latest results were considered by the FSA’s Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food (CoT) in a closed meeting on March 20. The CoT, whose meetings are usually open, noted “the public health importance of the findings”, but the results will not be released to the public or acted on until they have been published in a scientific journal, a process that will take several months.
The FSA and Professor Jim Stevenson, who led the project, said they could not discuss the results before then. It took the CoT more than two years to release its views on the earlier research because it was waiting for publication in a scientific journal. Independent experts say that consumers should consider removing these additives from their children’s diets now. The colours, tested on both three-year-olds and eight-to-nine year olds in the new study, were tartrazine (E102), ponceau 4R (E124), sunset yellow (E110), carmoisine (E122), quinoline yellow (E104) and allura red AC (E129). The preservative tested was sodium benzoate (E211).
Although these additives are widely used in the UK and are approved as safe and legal by the EU, some of the colours are banned in Scandinavian countries and the US. Campaign groups such as the Hyperactive Children’s Support Group have argued for years that children’s behaviour is improved by removing artifical colourings and other additives from their diets.
Vyvyan Howard, professor of bio-imaging at Ulster University and one of the experts on FSA’s additives and behaviour working group, said it was important that the new research was published in a scientific journal but that consumers had a choice. “It is biologically plausible that there could be an effect from these additives. While you are waiting for the results to come out you can choose not to expose your children to these substances. These compounds have no nutritonal value and I personally do not feed these sorts of foods to my 15-month-old daughter.”
Another member of the working group, Dr Alex Richardson, the director of Food and Behaviour Research and senior research scientist at Oxford University, said: “There are well-documented potential risks from these additives. In my view the researchers had done an excellent piece of work first time round and there was enough evidence to act. If this new study essentially replicates that, what more evidence do they need to remove these additives from children’s food and drink?”
The FSA has been considering the safety of these additives since 2000, when it received the results of the first trial known as the Isle of Wight study. That research concluded that “significant changes in children’s behaviour could be produced by the removal of colourings and additives from their diet [and] benefit would accrue for all children from such a change and not just for those already showing hyperactive behaviour or who are at risk of allergic reactions.”
The CoT, however, decided in 2002 that this study was inconclusive - although parents, who did not know whether their children were on a placebo or not, observed significant behavioural changes in those given the additives, other observers did not find the same changes when children were assessed in a clinic using computer games to measure inattention. So the FSA set up the new study to provide conclusive evidence, with a working group of independent experts giving advice on how best to design it.
If the findings of the new research do confirm the Isle of Wight work, “the implications would be enormous”, said Tim Lang, professor of food policy at City University, in London. “The stakes are very high; these are additives that children have been exposed to for years. I can understand the FSA wanting to be sure no one can accuse it of breaking scientific protocols but these findings need to come out quickly,” he added.
A spokeswoman for the FSA said the agency was “committed to handling science in the proper scientific way” and hoped the findings would be published in a matter of months. She added that all the additives involved “are approved for use in the EU and are safe”.
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian News and Media Limited 2007
If we were all in a consumers union, we could apply the proper market pressure to balance out corporate self-interest. We could force companies to not produce unnatural and untested products.
Great Idea macchendra!
ditto macchendra–excellent point.
When can we start?
The Center for Science in the Public Interest
http://www.cspinet.org/
has a comprehensive list of additions. Point to “Food Safety” and select “Food Additives” from the sub-menu.
There are already hundreds of consumer unions across the country. If you want corporations to stop making a specific product, stop buying it. It’s all very simple folks. I have not set foot in a Wal-Mart for years now and I’m doing fine. There is Consumer’s Union, the producers of consumer report Magazine and website, Co-op Ammerica and many more such groups. One problem with all of them in my opinion is that they all continue to use the term consumer. We need to curb our consumption big time in this country and stop pretending that our purchases are not connected to the wars we start and the global climate problems we are looking at. How can we expect solutions from people who all went to the same institutions of so called higher learning? John Kerry and George Bush are frat brothers people. It is no more complicated than that. All the so called activists on the left and the right generally follow the same fund raising patterns and all learned their craft at the same institutions. Pretending otherwise is living in denial. We need to stop being consumers to start with and learn how to live with less, much less. Think about the fact that if the world adopts our bullshit consumption lifestyle we’ll need 3 mroe planets to cover the cost. Or more accurately put, 2/3rds of all humans will starve and die off if we keep up the current pace of consumption. You want to stop corporate self interest? Then stop buying their products that you do not need to begin with. You’ll have to start by looking at your own life first though, not the lives of others.
Thanks, neoconned, for reminding us that we do all have choices…about where we shop, what we purchase and even whether we need to purchase something at all. We are a truly gluttonous society and are constantly bombarded through various media to buy, buy buy in order to be happy and successful members of society. What a crock. We are slowly destroying our planet. Let’s stop destroying our most precious resource, our children, by not feeding them all the chemicals which are now in most of the food products we purchase at the local supermarkets.
Let’s face it if “consumer’s” knew what was in the food we eat we wouldn’t eat at all!
Between the steroids in animals, pesticides used in growing produce there is not much out there. Then add a few color additives and preservatives and basically what everyone is eating is garbage. Even if one goes organic there isn’t any certainty but it does beat the alternative.
Unfortunately, children eat processed food because mommy and daddy both need to work to survive. Parents simply don’t have the time to prepare healthy meals from scratch.
Once again, this issue boils down to our wonderful financial system. See: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9050474362583451279&q=money+as+debt The fact is this system works against nature and has a derogatory impact on just about everyone’s health and well being.
Can you blame infants for being consumer freaks when they are getting perchlorate/jet fuel in their breast milk?
New study from CDC and Boston University shows babies getting unsafe dose of perchlorate, underscores need for
federal action
An Environmental Working Group (EWG) analysis of recently published data from scientists at the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Boston University (BU) shows that infants are being exposed to dangerous levels of the rocket fuel component perchlorate. The CDC/BU study, which examined breast milk from 49 Boston area women, found that the average infant in this study is being exposed to more than double the dose of perchlorate that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers safe; highly exposed babies are ingesting up to 10 times this amount. [1,2]
Boston area infants are exposed to unsafe levels of perchlorate in breast milk
At the 95th percentile perchlorate dose level in women with lower iodide intake, CDC found a 20% drop in thyroid hormone levels.
http://ewg.org/issues/perchlorate/20070329/analysis.php
Where are these mothers consuming this? FOOD!
Once again, if you read the article one will learn quickly what is going on….
“Yet, there are still no federal safety standards for perchlorate in drinking water or food. Under pressure from the Pentagon and the defense industry, EPA has delayed setting a drinking water standard for perchlorate.”
“There are already hundreds of consumer unions across the country.”
Ohhhh…
“If you want corporations to stop making a specific product, stop buying it.”
Sorry, I guess it was wrong for me to complain about any product.
“It’s all very simple folks. I have not set foot in a Wal-Mart for years now and I’m doing fine.”
Oh good. That’s what I was worried about.
“There is … many … such groups”
My bad.
I really apologize, I missed this one completely. Turns out that it was the work of Skull and Bones. Darn! Next time maybe.
“You want to stop corporate self interest? Then stop buying their products that you do not need to begin with. You’ll have to start by looking at your own life first though, not the lives of others.”
Got me! Sorry folks, I really just wanted to be a consumer.
Well, it looks like Wal-Mart will be the only entity capable of negotiating collectively with their suppliers. I bet they’ll be listened to.
Hey machendra, don’t take my post so personally. There is no conspiracy where things are being done in public view, however ask yourself how many Senators or Congresspersons will be adversely affected by any of their policies? Really all I am saying is that if anyone chooses to fight an enemy on there own turf, whether in Iraq, Vietnam, or against corporations in court, they will fail. Things which affect change come from new ways of thinking. New ways of thinking require thinking… rather than reacting. Most of my own problems in life come from myself. Once I begin to think about them and look to my own responsibility for them they seem to no longer be a problem. If I could now follow my own advice daily things would be perfect. Peace.
Some Presidential candidates are not taking lobbyist,special interest and PAC money which equals up to no payback.We all know that the special interests are the ones who have run this country with Bush as their leader.
We need the best candidate that can start fresh when he’s in the White House and start immediately thinking about the American people,not the paybacks.
That candidate exists.He is showing boldness in dealing with the war in Iraq,has a healthcare plan for all Americans as well as a global warming plan.
I hope you will educate yourselves on ALL the candidates .You can go to The Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan,non-profit research group www.opensecrets.org, and get the details,(pay attention to the $$ amounts). The only payback that this candidate will be making when elected will be to you!
The recent Chinese scandal is no surprise.
1. Wheat gluten is an expensive, desired source for protein in animal and human feed.
2. Wheat flour looks the same but is much less expensive and has less protein.
3. Adding the toxic chemical makes the wheat flour seem to have the protein of the wheat gluten.
4. China has minimal regulation, the food makers will not find problems they don’t look for, and the U.S. government doesn’t inspect, so a true capitalist is born.
5. The people in the U.S. will be upset but will forget in the next news cycle.
6. We are ready for the next ‘SURPRISE’.
Nice post Shakker…. think anyone will get it yet?
Gluten……bad stuff for me! It only took 47 years to be diagnosed with Celiac Disease. That is after I have become totally disabled from malnutrition due to the villi in my intestines being destroyed.
But you know people are supposed to be responsible for their own well being, it is never anyone else’s fault!
When we can do this to ourselves, to our children, as long as it looks good and is sweet we don’t care about the consequences. Are we really such an artifical society? If yes, we don’t care about the fall-out from depleted uranium on other peoples children. As long as it shows no effect immediately we can’t get sued.
Google: ASPARTAME for real horror stories about one of America’s most widely consumed additives. If you continue to use products with it in them you are committing slow suicide.