Food Coloring

The Production and Influence of Food Coloring

by Mallory Schiavo

            Green cheese? Black birthday cake? What about purple pickles? I would be willing to bet that none of these food options sound particularly enticing to you. That is because color plays a crucial role in determining which foods appeal to us and which do not. We have come to expect our foods to be certain colors (even when they are not naturally so) and any deviation from our expectations averts our appetite. It is this context that makes food coloring so influential. We rely on both natural and synthetic dyes to create what we want, causing changes in their production to greatly affect our diets. Conversely, changes in what we want to consume significantly impact food dye production.

(WordPress.com)

Natural Dyes

            Natural food coloring has been used since the days of ancient civilizations to enhance people’s eating experiences. “Natural” coloring refers to dyes that are made from materials found in nature, such as minerals, plants, insects, and animals (Lakshmi 87). While all coloring is derived from some original natural source, natural coloring is not chemically synthesized like synthetic coloring is. For example, saffron is a spice harvested from the saffron crocus flower that has been used to give food a yellow color since at least the 8^th century B.C.E., when Homer mentions it in The Iliad (Burrows 394). The process of turning saffron into a coloring is extremely laborious, given that it must be done by hand. This involves each small, red stigma of the flower being plucked from the rest of the plant and then dried before use. Because of their more difficult methods of production, natural dyes have been reserved for upper classes throughout history. (Even today, saffron is increasingly more expensive and hard to come by, earning it the nickname “red gold.”) It is natural colorings such as saffron, as well as paprika, turmeric, beet extract, and flower petals, that earlier civilizations depended on to add desired color to food (Burrows 87). Such limited sources narrowed food coloring choices to red, yellow, green, blue, and brown, with little possibility for varying shades (Schriver 154). This dependence on nature lasted well into the modern age, as it was not until the 19^th century that synthetic dyes were introduced.

Saffron crocus flowers.

(Amazon.com)

Saffron stigmas extracted for spice.

(TheSpiceHouse.com)

Synthetic Dyes

            In 1856, English chemist Sir William Henry Perkin accidentally created the first synthetic dye, mauveine. While attempting to synthesize the chemical compound quinine to form an anti-malarial drug, he ended up creating a purple dye instead. Though he failed in his original endeavor, Perkin recognized the value of his accidental discovery and quickly patented the dye. Initially known as aniline purple, mauveine (or mauve) was produced from the organic compound aniline, which was derived from petroleum or coal. This serendipitous discovery forever changed food coloring (as well as the textile industry), for it led to the creation of hundreds of new synthetic dyes known as “coal-tar colors.” These new chemically produced colors were less difficult to create, less expensive, and better at retaining color (Burrows 396). The achievement of synthetic dyes has granted food manufacturers a plethora of color possibilities, from brightly colored candy to an array of breakfast cereals. In addition, cheap production costs and widespread use have expanded food coloring to the common person’s consumption, as opposed to the earlier days of expensive natural dyes.

William Henry Perkin, creator of first synthetic dye.

(ScienceHistory.org)

Silk Perkin dyed with mauve invention.

(CNN.com)

Dye Regulations

            However, this new age of food dyes began to face limitations as government regulations were enacted. In the U.S., the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act banned the sale of any so-called “adulterated” food. This included any food with added ingredients that were harmful to consumers’ health. The act also prohibited coloring food as a means of hiding poor quality. In order to investigate which food dyes were harmful, the Bureau of Chemistry gradually tested all 80 that were in use. By 1938, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had approved 15 synthetic dyes for use in food. In the same year, the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act was passed, providing more specifications on food dye regulation. It held that all synthetic dyes in food had to be listed by the FDA as harmless and that each batch of coloring required testing and certification before use.

Public Opinion

            In the decades that have followed, food coloring has faced changes in both regulation and public opinion, shaping the way we eat. While the inception of synthetic food dye caused much excitement (mainly on the part of manufacturers), its progression has stirred a great deal of controversy regarding its safety. For example, in the 1950s, cases of children falling ill from Halloween candy and popcorn sparked public alarm. This resulted in three synthetic dyes (Orange 1, Orange 2, and Red 32) being retested for harmlessness. When they were shown to cause serious health defects in lab animals, they were removed from the FDA approval list (Burrows 400). Similar instances have occurred over time and with each new study, food scare, dye removal, etc., the public has grown more wary of synthetic food colorings. The significance of public sentiment is exemplified by the absence of red M&M’s from 1976 to 1987. When the FDA banned Red 2 in 1976 due to inconclusive safety tests, the Mars manufacturing company decided to discontinue the beloved red-colored M&M, despite it not using that particular dye. Mars wanted to ensure that consumers were not turned away from buying M&M’s just from the sight of red food coloring. So, it replaced the red M&M with orange, until public fear died down and the red was reintroduced, giving us the six-colored mix we enjoy today.  

(Nuts.com)

            Currently, public attitude seems to be continuing on the trend away from synthetic food colorings. Health experts, doctors, news articles, and next-door neighbors have joined together to warn parents against feeding their children synthetic, or commonly known as “artificial,” dyes. A recent report by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) found that the nine synthetic food dyes currently used in the U.S. are likely carcinogenic, cause hypersensitivity and behavioral problems, and are not tested thoroughly enough (Potera A428). Understandably, public concern is in abundance and it is leading more companies to change their ingredients, such as the recent announcement that General Mills will no longer use artificial dyes in its popular cereals (Lucky Charms, Trix, etc.). Such changes demonstrate the way in which food manufacturers are bending to meet consumers’ desires. This has led to a global increase in the natural food coloring market, which has already reached $1 billion (Lakshmi 88). In all, if public opinion continues to favor natural colorings, synthetic dyes may be doomed. A return to the days of exclusively-natural food dyes might very well be in our future. Only time will tell.

Trix cereal before and after change to natural dyes.

(TheAtlantic.com) 

Bibliography

Burrows, Adam. “Palette of Our Palates: A Brief History of Food Coloring and Its Regulation.” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, vol. 8, issue 4, 2009, pp. 394-408. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00089.x. Wiley Online Library Accessed 23 May 2018.

Lakshmi, Chaitanya. “Food Coloring: The Natural Way.” Research Journal of Chemical Sciences, vol. 4, no. 2, 2014, pp. 87-96. www.isca.in/rjcs/Archives/v4/i2/15.ISCA-RJCS-2014-007.pdf. Accessed 23 May 2018.

Potera, Carol. “Diet and Nutrition: The Artificial Blues.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 118, no. 10, 2010, pp. A428. www.jstor.org/stable/20778567. JSTOR. Accessed 23 May 2018.

Schriver, Dorothy. “A Century of Color.” The Science News-Letter, vol. 70, no. 10, 1956, pp. 154-155. www.jstor.org/stable/3937545. JSTOR. Accessed 23 May 2018.