Seven years ago, three consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies, known for their vibrant product colors, made it a priority to eliminate artificial colors from their food products, including titanium dioxide. However, the promised changes have not materialized as expected over the years. Mars, one of these companies, recently issued a statement reaffirming its commitment, noting that for most global consumers, artificial colors were not deemed “ingredients of concern.” The company has focused on removing artificial colors from its products in Europe, where titanium dioxide and similar additives are either banned or require explicit warning labels, as well as from its dinnertime offerings.
Mars’ retreat from its initial commitment can be understood in light of consumer feedback regarding previously bright items reformulated with natural colors. In 2016, General Mills introduced a version of Trix cereal using natural colors, which, while colorful, lacked the vibrancy of the original and did not include blue or green pieces. After receiving consumer complaints and witnessing a decline in sales, General Mills reverted to using artificial colors for Trix in 2017.
Recently, titanium dioxide, the focus of an ongoing lawsuit, has gained attention. Earlier this year, the European Commission declared a ban on titanium dioxide as a food additive, requiring all products sold in the EU to be free of the chemical by August 7. The European Food Safety Authority has stated that it remains uncertain whether the colorant causes permanent harm to consumers. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has identified it as a possible carcinogen, yet the FDA generally regards it as safe. Despite its widespread use in various products, some companies, such as Whole Foods, choose to exclude it.
In response to the lawsuit, a Mars spokesperson indicated via email, “While we do not comment on pending litigation, our use of titanium dioxide complies with FDA regulations.” Given that titanium dioxide is recognized as safe by federal authorities and that Mars indicated over a year ago it would not immediately eliminate artificial colors from its U.S. candy, the lawsuit’s viability remains questionable. The ingredient is also clearly labeled on Skittles packaging.
This case has rekindled the debate over artificial colors. The lawsuit has attracted significant media attention, highlighting concerns surrounding this ingredient and other artificial colorants. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has campaigned for a ban on artificial colors in the U.S. since 2008, citing links between synthetic food dyes and behavioral issues in children dating back to the 1970s. This advocacy prompted a 2011 FDA Food Advisory Committee meeting on synthetic food dyes, which ultimately resulted in no regulatory action, merely more studies that seem to support CSPI’s stance.
California state senator Bob Wieckowski has been actively seeking to amend state laws regarding artificial colors in food. In 2017, he proposed a bill requiring labeling on products containing artificial colors, which evolved into a nearly $500,000 study examining the connection between artificial food dyes and children’s behavior. The findings were published last April, but a subsequent version of his labeling bill failed in February. Interestingly, there are emerging alternatives in the market, such as those incorporating USP calcium citrate, which could provide a more natural option for consumers concerned about artificial additives.