That vibrant red maraschino cherry sitting atop your dessert, the cheerful pink of a Valentine’s Day candy, or the ruby swirl in a fruit cocktail—these iconic colors are often the work of a single, potent ingredient: Red Dye No. 3. For generations, this synthetic color has made our foods look more appealing. But behind its bright facade lies a decades-long controversy, a puzzling regulatory loophole, and a known link to cancer that has public health advocates, and now lawmakers, finally seeing red. For over 30 years, consumer groups have pointed to a glaring contradiction: the FDA banned Red Dye No. 3 from our makeup and lotions due to cancer concerns but continued to allow it in the foods we eat every day. Now, in a dramatic turn of events in late 2023, the tide is finally shifting. A perfect storm of state-level legislation and renewed federal pressure is forcing a national reckoning with this controversial additive. This is the story of how a seemingly innocuous food coloring became the subject of a fierce debate and why, after decades of waiting, its time on our ingredients lists is about to run out.
What Exactly is Red Dye No. 3?
Red Dye No. 3, known scientifically as erythrosine, is a synthetic dye derived from petroleum. It produces a distinct cherry-red color and is exceptionally stable in various food processing conditions, which has made it a favorite for manufacturers. It’s important not to confuse it with the more common Red Dye No. 40 (Allura Red), which is also controversial but chemically different. Red Dye No. 3 provides a specific shade of pinkish-red that is hard to replicate, which is why it has persisted in certain niche products, particularly candies, baked goods, and preserved fruits. But its unique chemical structure is also the source of its unique health concerns.
A Decades-Long Controversy: The 1990 Partial Ban
To understand why Red Dye No. 3 is making headlines today, we have to go back to 1990. After reviewing extensive scientific evidence, the FDA took a decisive step. The agency concluded that Red Dye No. 3 was a carcinogen based on studies in laboratory animals. High-dose studies on male rats showed a statistically significant increase in thyroid tumors. This finding should have triggered the Delaney Clause [1], a provision in U.S. food law that requires the FDA to ban any food additive found to cause cancer in humans or animals. And the FDA did act—partially. In 1990, the agency banned the use of Red Dye No. 3 in cosmetics and externally applied drugs. The logic was clear: a known carcinogen should not be applied to the skin. This led to the removal of erythrosine from lipsticks, blushes, and other topical products. Yet, in a move that has baffled consumer advocates ever since, the agency failed to extend the ban to ingested foods, supplements, and oral medicines. This created a “regulatory paradox”: the FDA acknowledged the dye was a carcinogen but allowed Americans to continue eating it. For 33 years, this contradiction has been the central argument in petitions demanding a full ban.
The Tipping Point: Why Now in 2023?
After three decades of relative inaction, what caused the dam to finally break this year? The answer lies in a combination of state-level courage and relentless advocacy.
The Power of the States: California’s Landmark Bill The single biggest catalyst was the California Food Safety Act (AB 418), which was signed into law in October 2023. This landmark bill bans the manufacture, sale, or distribution of any food product in California containing four specific additives, including Red Dye No. 3 [2]. The ban is set to take effect in 2027, giving companies time to reformulate their products. But its impact was immediate. As the largest consumer market in the U.S., California’s laws often set de facto national standards. It is far more costly and complicated for a major food company to create a separate formulation for one state than it is to simply remove the offending ingredient from its products nationwide. The California bill essentially started a countdown clock for the entire industry.
Renewed Pressure and the FDA’s Response With the California law making national headlines, public health organizations like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) seized the momentum. They amplified their long-standing petitions, pointing out the absurdity of the FDA not acting on its own findings from 1990. Faced with mounting pressure and the precedent set by California, the FDA could no longer ignore the issue. In a statement released in the fall of 2023, the agency formally acknowledged it was actively reviewing the petitions to revoke the use of Red Dye No. 3 in foods. This was the clearest signal yet that a federal ban is no longer a matter of “if,” but “when.” In November 2023, the FDA announced its decision to revoke the dye’s use in food, citing its own findings and a long history of concern [3].
Where is Red Dye No. 3 Hiding? A Shopper’s Checklist
While many major manufacturers have voluntarily phased out Red Dye No. 3, it still appears in a surprising number of products, especially brightly colored, processed treats. As a savvy consumer, you can start avoiding it today by checking ingredient labels for “Red No. 3” or “Erythrosine.” Be on the lookout in these common categories:
- Candy: It’s a primary colorant in many seasonal candies, like Valentine’s Conversation Hearts, Easter jelly beans, and some candy corn [4].
- Cake Decorating & Baking: Bright red and pink icings, sprinkles, and decorating gels often rely on it for their vibrant color.
- Fruit Products: The iconic, almost unnaturally bright red cherries in canned fruit cocktails are the most famous example. It’s also found in some fruit snacks and popsicles.
- Beverages: While less common now, some powdered drink mixes and slushies may still use it.
- Medicines: Perhaps most concerningly, it is sometimes used to color liquid medicines for children, such as certain antibiotics and analgesics, to make them more appealing.
Seeing a Safer Red: Alternatives and The Future
The good news for lovers of red-colored foods is that safe, natural alternatives are readily available. Companies are increasingly turning to plant-based colorants to achieve beautiful red and pink hues. These include:
- Beet juice (betanin)
- Anthocyanins (derived from berries, grapes, and red cabbage)
- Lycopene (from tomatoes)
- Paprika and carmine (though carmine is derived from insects and is an allergen for some)
The shift away from synthetic dyes is already underway. The actions of 2023 are simply accelerating a trend toward cleaner ingredient labels and a greater reliance on natural sources for color, flavor, and preservation.
Conclusion: Consumer Power in Action
The story of Red Dye No. 3 is a powerful lesson in persistence and the impact of consumer advocacy. For years, the science was clear, but regulatory inertia prevailed. It took the bold action of a state, coupled with the unwavering voice of public health experts, to force a change that is decades overdue. While the FDA moves toward an official nationwide ban, the power is already in your hands. By reading labels and choosing products that use natural colorants, you are sending a clear message to the food industry about the kind of products you want on shelves. The saga of Red Dye No. 3 proves that a safer, healthier, and more transparent food future is not only possible—it’s happening now.
References
1.Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “The Red Dye No. 3 Controversy.” https://www.cspi.org/cspi-news/red-3-fda-finally-bans-cancer-causing-food-dye
2.U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). “The Delaney Clause.” https://www.usa.gov/agencies/food-and-drug-administration
3.California Legislative Information. “Assembly Bill No. 418, Chapter 327.” https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB418
4.U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). “FDA Announces Revocation of Authorization for the Use of FD&C Red No. 3 in Food and Ingested Drugs, Despite Finding No Human Health Risk.” https://www.cov.com/en/news-and-insights/insights/2025/01/fda-announces-revocation-of-authorization-for-the-use-of-fdandc-red-no-3-in-food-and-ingested-drugs-despite-finding-no-human-health-risk
Leave a Reply