• lewdian69@lemmy.worldEnglish
    36·
    16 hours ago

    From the very first sentence. "The FDA is revoking the authorization for the use of FD&C Red No. 3 as a matter of law, based on the Delaney Clause "

    From the next paragraph after your quote, emphasis mine.

    "The Delaney Clause, enacted in 1960 as part of the Color Additives Amendment to the FD&C Act, prohibits FDA authorization of a food additive or color additive if it has been found to induce cancer in humans or animals. "

    Perhaps we don’t agree with the Delaney Clause or think the FDA should not have a role in protecting animals, but they are the regulatory body for human and animal food, and by removing this dye from all food helps prevent animals from accidental ingestion.

    • Darkassassin07English
      12·
      16 hours ago

      Ah, that’s the bit I missed ‘or animals’.

      Without that it just sounds like they’re arguing against themselves.

      • lewdian69@lemmy.worldEnglish
        2·
        11 hours ago

        I mean, it still sounds like they are arguing against themselves even with the ‘or animals’ to be fair.

    • EtherWhack@lemmy.worldEnglish
      44·
      14 hours ago

      It sorta sounds reminiscent of MSG, in that they gave rats an excessive amount until it finally caused genetic damage.

      I don’t disagree with using natural and benign colorants (or even none at all), but this almost borders on dishonesty by tricking the ill-informed which can trigger a backlash of even more distrust.