271
How are you going to enforce that without inspections, numb nuts?
this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2025
271 points (97.5% liked)
News
29033 readers
4103 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They aren't! Honestly. I assume that this is just virtue signaling?
I would think that if I wasn't so certain that RFK Jr was actually a complete moron
Just what I was thinking.
YouTube influencers will submit tips to the FDA food dye hotline. Suspects will be immediately sued by the FDA and have to prove their innocence in court. In the mean time, all employees report to RFK ADHD work camps to break rocks searching for healing crystals.
Did this worm farm just do something decent?
It says "remove them", not "forbid them". The Nation's food supply is going to be dunked in ammonia before you can eat it.
Adding a "/s" because given the times this sounds weirdly plausible...
I mean you already bleach the chicken to try and offset the horrendous food safety standards through the rest of the chain...
I'm going to assume that worm brain will move to ban more than the programmatic petroleum-based additives and ban anything that has a synthetic sounding name.
When the pigeon knocks over the chess pieces, it sometimes accidently makes a good move.
And a dumpster fire provides warmth.
This is very much a stopped clock situation.
Also, how are they gonna regulate and enforce this, considering the FDA is gonna stop administering food safety?
Despite jr being a massive fuckwit, this is actually good
I'm in Canada where we have restricted some food dyes. I miss the old colours of Froot Loops and Smarties (similar to M&Ms, not rockets). But it's fine because those colourants really do only exist to make junk food look good.
It's not clear to me the exact scope of what they consider to be artifical dyes though. Is a dye produced by a genetically modified bacteria natural enough?
Conservatives have been saying that Dems want to force them to eat bugs, so it's a little strange to be tacitly encouraging the use of Natural Red 4 which is made from crushed beetles.
The fun thing about "natural" vs "artificial" dyes is pretty nothingburger in reality. The manufacturers of chemical dyes, scents, etc. just generate the chemical by whatever means. If it's a "natural" flavor/scent/color it is derived from something like a beetle or a flower. If it's "artificial" it is derived via a chemical process. The end product is the same.
Reminds me of some years back when Starbucks answered the cry of, "but we don't want artificial flavors/colors in our coffee!" so they started using a red dye for one of their drinks that was derived from crushed up beetle shells. People then freaked out, "I don't want to drink beetle shells!!!!!!"
TL;DR: The end product is the same, whether it be natural or artificial. The real concern, is if the product should really be consumed at all.
The Big Brains like RFK Jr. likely lack the mental capacity to understand such concepts, so all the dyes will become "natural" and stick around, and just increase the number of purée'd parakeets. Basically, another shitty cup game.
TL;DR: The end product is the same, whether it be natural or artificial. The real concern, is if the product should really be consumed at all.
This is hot crap. They are different chemicals, the end product is not the same and you're spouting misinformation.
Most of the artificial dyes that people have banned in countries other than the USA are derived from petrochemicals. Natural dyes have been in use far longer and have been shown to have fewer negative health outcomes.
Eg. Red dye containing bugs (cochineal, E120) has no known health effects except to an extremely small percentage of the population whom are allergic to bugs, hence it is marked as an ingredient when used, to alert those with allergies. Its replacement alternatives are:
- red dye #2 (amaranth, E123) which was made from coal tar, and is now made from petroleum byproducts. It is a suspected carcinogen and is banned in most of the world including the US.
- red dye #3 (erythrosine, E127) was first extracted from coal tar and is derived from phenol, currently extracted from petroleum byproducts and it is a known carcinogen and restricted heavily in what it can be used in since the early 1990s in every developed nation except the USA, until this very announcement by the FDA and RFK jr which will bring the USA in line with the rest of the world's protections. California also separately banned it in October 2023.
- red dye 40 (Allura red) is an entirely synthetic dye invented by a chemical corporation in 1971 by azo coupling between diazotized 5-amino-4-methoxy-2-toluenesulfonic acid and 6-hydroxy-2-naphthalene sulfonic acid. I don't know what that means in order to determine if its feedstocks are petrochemicals, but mice studies showed bowel disorders and DNA damage which caused several countries to ban it over the years, however it's currently believed to be safe if the maximum daily limit is adhered to.
And that's just red dye.
You're talking about different chemicals as a comparison not a 1:1. I'll concede that some dyes may indeed exist only from chemical derivation. However, many do not. We've already put more thought into this than RFJ Jr. has, btw. (Not all dyes referenced below are foodsafe, to be clear, just a quick comparison chart.)
Random table of dyes that can be derived both ways:
| Dye Name | Natural Source | Synthetic Production | Chemical Formula | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indigo | Indigofera tinctoria (plant) | From aniline via Baeyer-Drewsen synthesis | C₁₆H₁₀N₂O₂ | PubChem, Shepherd Textiles |
| Alizarin | Rubia tinctorum (madder root) | From anthraquinone | C₁₄H₈O₄ | Wikipedia, PubChem |
| Tyrian Purple | Murex sea snails | Bromination of indigo | C₁₆H₈Br₂N₂O₂ | Wikipedia, PMC Article |
| Cochineal (Carminic Acid) | Dactylopius coccus (insect) | Complex synthesis; often insect-derived | C₂₂H₂₀O₁₃ | PubChem, Wikipedia |
| Curcumin | Curcuma longa (turmeric root) | Lab synthesis possible | C₂₁H₂₀O₆ | PubChem, Wikipedia |
| Lawsone | Lawsonia inermis (henna leaves) | From 1,4-naphthoquinone | C₁₀H₆O₃ | Wikipedia, ACS |
| Betanin | Beta vulgaris (beetroot) | Rarely synthesized due to complexity | C₂₄H₂₆N₂O₁₃ | Wikipedia, PubChem |
| Quercetin | Various plants (e.g., onions, apples) | Can be synthesized; mostly extracted | C₁₅H₁₀O₇ | Wikipedia, PubChem |
Yeah, fair enough.
It's the one position he holds that isn't completely crazy (and that shot of him being forced to pose with a Big Mac was pure comedy). He'll kill millions with his vaccine views, but I can get behind this.
Of course if a Dem announced this, conservatives would be drinking paint in solidarity with dye manufacturers.
People are use to the color. Dyes get banned. People see what the food looks like without the dyes. People get weirded out over it - like the green ketchup from Sherk promotions. People eat less of it. Health improves due to people eating less (diet and food moderation ftw).
RFK claims success.
Yeah except we'll all be inhaling even more VOCs and working in mines so is it really a win?
I'll take any win I can get.
natural dyes still exist (which doesn’t imply they’re necessarily healthier; just that if banning artificial dyes that doesn’t mean there will be no food colouring)… afaik australia has much stricter regulation around some of this, and tbh you can barely tell the difference… some products are slightly less vibrant, but honestly if you’re not directly comparing them you don’t even notice
That's honestly the least unhinged policy he's likely to push.
Canada and the EU did that year's ago.
You can't eat dyes in food when you have died from a pandemic
So they found an expert in the field whose last name is Nestle. It's not confusing at all.
Marion Nestle isn't just AN expert. She is THE expert in food science. You would be hard done by to find a more qualified and well spoken fount of knowledge.
- Brandeis University, lecturer in biology, 1971-73
- Brandeis University, assistant professor of biology, 1974-76
- UCSF School of Medicine, lecturer in biochemistry and biophysics, 1976-84
- UCSF School of Medicine, associate dean, school of medicine, human biology programs administrative director, medical scientist training program, 1976-86
- UCSF School of Medicine, lecturer in medicine, 1979-84
- UCSF School of Medicine, acting director, medical scientist training program 1983-84
- UCSF School of Medicine, lecturer in family and community medicine, 1984-85
- UCSF School of Medicine, director, John Tung/American Cancer Society clinical nutrition education center, 1984-86
- UCSF School of Medicine, adjunct associate professor, family and community medicine, 1985-86
- UCSF School of Medicine, associated faculty, Institute for Health Policy Studies and Institute for Aging Health Policy, 1983-86
- Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, DC, staff director for nutrition policy, senior nutrition policy advisor, managing editor, Surgeon General's Report on Nutrition and Health (1988), 1986-88
- New York University, School of Education, professor and chair, nutrition and food studies, 1998-2003
- New York University, professor and director of Public Health Initiatives, 2003-04
- New York University, Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, c. 2004—
- New York University, honorary professor in the Department of Sociology, 2006
She literally wrote the book on how nutrition is politicized and obfusticated by capital.
Despite the surname and expertise in food, she's unrelated to the Nestle family. Just a bit of fun nominative determinism.
nominative determinism
One of my favorite phrases
TIL, thank you. I'll be looking out for future statements of her.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I mean. This was already on its way. I thought Trump would force it to be reversed.
view more: next ›