Manufacturers sticking to food colour guidelines: FSANZ
Australian children are consuming low levels of food colours, according to a survey of added colours in foods released today by Food Standards Australia New Zealand.
FSANZ’s Chief Scientist, Dr Paul Brent said the results of this survey were very positive and indicate that colours are not being used above maximum permitted levels, or at levels that would pose a risk to consumers. “This survey provides significant reassurance that there is no public health and safety risk from the consumption of foods containing added colours as part of a balanced diet,” he suggested. “The survey found that the concentrations of added colours in foods in Australia are very low, mostly less than 25% of the maximum permitted levels. It also showed that estimated dietary exposures to all permitted synthetic food colours were less than 10% of the Acceptable Daily Intake for all population groups assessed, even for high consumers of added food colour.”
“Additionally, the survey found that the average concentrations of synthetic colours in foods were well below the concentrations used in the recent UK Southampton study into colours and behavioural change, which found limited evidence that mixtures of certain colours and sodium benzoate had an effect on the activity and attention of children,” Dr Brent said. “For example, the UK study assumed a concentration of 67 mg/kg of the colour tartrazine in confectionery, whereas the average concentration of tartrazine in confectionery in the FSANZ survey was only 10 mg/kg.”
There have been calls this year for a ban in Australia on the six food additives used in the Southampton study, but FSANZ dismissed the claims, believing the use of food additives to be different in Australia.
Australian children are also consuming food colours at much lower levels than the amounts used in the UK Southampton study, Dr Brent advised. “For example, on average, 6 to 12 year olds in Australia are consuming the food colour tartrazine at 14% of the amount used for 8 to 9 year olds in the UK study and are consuming the colour sunset yellow at 21% and 8% of the amounts used in the UK study (in the two mixes),” he reported. “FSANZ does recognise that adverse reactions to foods and food additives occur in a small proportion of the population. These reactions are not the same as allergies but may include rashes and swelling of the skin, irritable bowel symptoms, behavioural changes in children and headaches.”
“Additives (including colours) cannot be included in foods unless they are approved and included in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. Food additives which are in a food or drink to perform a function must be identified on the label with either their name or its specific code numbers. The FSANZ survey found very good consistency with labelling requirements with nearly all colours detected listed on the food label,” Dr Brent stated.
“FSANZ has commenced dialogue with peak food industry bodies on the current and future uses of synthetic and natural colours in foods, to inform future work by FSANZ,” he concluded.
The analytical survey, commissioned by FSANZ, quantified actual levels of all permitted synthetic colours and two natural colours, annatto and cochineal/carmine in foods and beverages in Australia, in order to accurately estimate dietary exposure and assess the potential risk to human health for Australians.
The full survey report can be found on the Food Standards Australia New Zealand website at www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/Colours%20Survey_Final%20Report%2022%20Oct%2008%20_2_.pd
Dear Food news.
I really believe FSANZ have got it wrong. The evidence against artificial colours is there in the community.
I distribute a range of naturally coloured apple juice based slush products into schools nationally. When we started we were determined to make the range as natural as possible and asked our manufacturer to create a range free from artificial colours and sodium benzoate. The only colour we couldn’t replace was 133 brilliant blue. As we had some existing customers that insisted they had to have it and the jury seemed to be out on it at that moment we included it in the range.
To our dismay some of our customers in small schools with single bowl machines running a variety of flavours in rotation reported to us that on the days they ran the blue slush the teachers had much more difficulty with the children than on days when the other colours were run. The teachers have requested the canteen not order the blue again.
This was confirmation of our own suspicions about the additive 133 and we immediately dropped it from the range.
I really don’t think the quantity of colouring consumed matters. I am convinced from my own personal experiences ( i have 3 children myself) and those of the parents and staff at the schools we deal with everyday that coal tar derived chemicals and benzoate preservatives affects all kids – and adults – it is merely a matter of degree.
There are plenty of natural alternatives that are only fractionally more expensive to use – so why aren’t more manufacturers changing over? Why are FSANZ so hesitant to protect us?
Frankly as more of the population become aware of the issue it is the manufacturers who go low additive and natural who will be in the better market position. Nestle bowed to public pressure on Smarties. More and more customers are simply voting with their wallets.
Go natural or it will be you who perishes not your products!