In this video, the speaker examines the controversy surrounding artificial food dyes, especially Red 40, against the backdrop of recent political attention (RFK Jr.’s HHS appointment, Kellogg’s protests). He explains the difference between “absence of evidence” and “evidence of absence” in FDA safety assessments, then reviews a Cell Metabolism mouse study showing that Red 40 and Yellow 6 are metabolized by gut bacteria into a compound (ANSANA) that triggers colitis in mice with elevated IL‑23 signaling—a pathway also targeted in human IBD therapies. The speaker emphasizes that the effect appears only in susceptible hosts, notes that the doses used were below human ADI, and argues that human variability in IL‑23 and microbiome composition could make some people vulnerable. He broadens the discussion to the larger food system, criticizing subsidies that promote ultra‑processed, sugar‑laden foods and SNAP spending on junk foods, while suggesting that individual dietary choices (e.g., avoiding sugary cereals, opting for low‑carb, dye‑free alternatives) are more impactful than focusing solely on dyes. He discloses his advisory role with a dye‑free, low‑carb cereal, stresses that he receives no affiliate revenue, and concludes with a call for curiosity, reasonable skepticism, and reduced sugar consumption.
Chapters
The intense controversy over the potential harms of artificial food dyes has taken center stage in recent months, given the appointment of RFK Jr. as the head of HHS and the army of protesters that swarmed the Kellogg's headquarters in Michigan in October, collecting over 400,000 signatures to protest the presence of artificial food dyes in foods like children's breakfast cereal. But is there actually cause for concern, or is this just bluster and hype? And also, what does RFK Jr. likely not know about food dyes? Unless he watches this video, which he is free to do. But transparent ploys aside, the US Food and Drug Administration says it's reviewed and evaluated the effects of color additives and food dyes and believes that most children have no adverse effects while consuming them. But here's the big problem. What are they safety testing for? You see, there's a big difference between saying a food dye doesn't have any adverse effects and that there isn't strong evidence that food dyes have any particular adverse effects. And this is because if you never ask the question properly, you won't have evidence of harm. But just because you don't have evidence of harm, if you didn't ask the question, doesn't mean there isn't actually harm there. And this is the difference between absence of evidence and evidence of absence. And it's science 101. Now, in the rest of this video, I'm going to highlight that key fact by reviewing data suggesting that the most common food dye in the world, Red 40, also known as Allura Red AC, which has an annual production exceeding 2.3 million kilograms and is found in foods like M&M's, fruit loops, yogurt, pastries, popsicles, sports drinks, and gums, and so on, may contribute to inflammation, and specifically inflammatory bowel disease. Now pause for a big, big point. My job here is not going to be to prove without a shadow of a doubt that Red40 causes a negative outcome, here inflammatory bowel disease, but simply to show that in the context of never having properly asked the clinical question, a key question about the risks of Red 40 and other food dyes, the evidence actually does seem to suggest it could be putting specific vulnerable people at risk. And "could" is a really important word here in the context of confident claims of safety. In fact, paraphrasing from the paper, the colitis-inducing properties of Red 40 in susceptible animals are in contrast to its reported safety profile. The WHO says extensive safety testing has demonstrated that Red 40 has no adverse, cytotoxic, carcinogenic, or mutagenic effects. Now, the paper in question that we're going to talk about was published in the prestigious science journal Cell Metabolism. And it's entitled— brace for this— Food colorants metabolized by commensal bacteria promote colitis in mice with dysregulated expression of interleukin-23. Don't worry, we're going to break it down. But in it, the authors reveal a mechanism whereby in susceptible hosts, the food dyes Red 40 and also Yellow 6 can be metabolized by gut bacteria and increase inflammation in the intestines to promote inflammatory bowel disease or IBD. Now, to be clear, if I haven't made this point already, this was a mouse study. However, I want to highlight that this mechanism that they describe in the paper is really interesting since the pathways in question intersect with known IBD treatments in human patients. Specifically, the pathway in question is dependent on an inflammatory molecule, interleukin-23, or IL-23, which is a drug target for prescribed drugs for human IBD, including ulcerative colitis, which really sucks. I know I've had it, and Crohn's disease. So already on the surface, this is making sense. Food dyes interact with pathways known to play some role in human IBD. And westernized diets also have high levels of these food dyes that also associate with inflammatory bowel disease. And in susceptible animal models, high levels of IL-23 combined with these food dyes can trigger colitis. Anyway, in terms of the actual data in this study, because I do want to show you some, when they fed susceptible mice human foodstuffs with Red 40, including Kool-Aid or Pedialyte Cherry Punch, the mice developed colitis. But they did not develop colitis when they got a similar solution without the Red 40. So what you're seeing here in this figure is that when susceptible mice are given Red 40 or the human foods with Red 40, they develop inflammation in their intestines. However, given the control solution without the Red 40, They're totally fine. At least their intestines are totally fine. And mechanistically, this effect was found to be dependent on the transformation, the chemical transformation of the food dyes, the Red 40 and the Yellow 6, by common microbes in the gut of both mice and humans into another compound called, again brace for it, 1-amino-2-naphthyl-6-sulfonate sodium, or ANSANA for short. Although the jargon really is not important here, I'm just trying to sound smart. What really is important here is that the Red 40 and also the Yellow 6 food dyes can trigger colitis in susceptible animal models, and this is dependent on microbiome metabolism. Here, the true emphasis is on susceptible organisms. An underlying vulnerability, here related to high levels of inflammatory cytokine, the IL-23 that we mentioned, was required in order for the food dye to trigger colitis. That said, bringing it back to the human context, there is huge variation in how different human beings express different biomolecules, including IL-23, which again is known to play a role in human inflammatory bowel diseases. So presumably this predisposition to colitis exists in the population, and in effect consuming certain food dyes might be akin to playing roulette with your health since you don't know what your vulnerabilities are until it's too late. And importantly, with respect to this paper, the doses they used were modest. They were low. So quoting from the paper, when given to mice that were the susceptible mice with the increased IL-23 signaling, there was the promotion of T-cell mediated colitis, even when used at doses that are lower than those considered safe in humans. The acceptable daily intake is 7 milligrams per kilogram of body weight in humans. But let's pause and take a big step back because this conversation, it's not really about colitis at all, is it? This bigger idea is that absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. And just because we haven't documented the impact of a food additive— here, food dyes, but there are many more— on a given outcome or chronic disease, it doesn't mean it couldn't have that effect, especially in vulnerable subjects. And when you scale this up to tens of thousands of additives in our food supply with questionable long-term safety testing and drop all of those into a massive human population with a huge mix of disease susceptibilities— we're all very individual— well, the inevitable outcome is going to be poor health. But that then begs the question, What do we do? And honestly, here's my hot take: food dyes may not be great, they may come with risks, but if you really are invested in being healthy or promoting good health in the next generation, in children, then go a step further. Because Froot Loops made with natural food dyes instead of artificial food dyes are still a bowl of sugar. The food dye conversation is, in my opinion, kind of a distraction from the bigger conversations we need to we have about the food environment and a problem that can be easily circumvented. The food dyes at an individual level, if you just choose with your daily dollars not to purchase Froot Loops and sugary sports drinks and candy, have eggs for breakfast, drink some water. Trying to fix the Froot Loop problem by changing the food dye is like trying to fix a car with only two wheels by painting a flame on the side and yelling Vroom! Doesn't really work. Now, I know I'm going to get some heat for being dismissive, but that is genuinely my authentic present position. And if you want cereal, there are better options. Now, I am going to share quickly an example with data before going on to drop some crazy truth bombs about government subsidies. But as the cereal example, the better option, I'm actually on the scientific advisory board of a company that produces a high protein, zero net carb, glycemic neutral, and artificial food dye-free cereal. Compared to Froot Loops, dyes or no dyes, there is no comparison when it comes to the healthfulness of these two options. Froot Loops have 22 grams of carbs per measly 27 grams. It's about an ounce. Setting aside food dyes and versus this other option that is zero net carbs, In fact, a colleague of mine or colleagues of mine have tested this cereal on themselves using continuous glucose monitors. And here are the results compared to Froot Loops. You can see there is no competition. Now, truthfully, I personally don't care if you buy this cereal. You can, and I'll link it below, but I get no money from your purchases. My interest is in the science and providing options to people. And let me repeat. Options, options, options. If you haven't gotten the memo, people like options and some people will want the Red 40 Froot Loops. They exist because of consumer demand. Others will opt for eggs and water like me, and others still will want cereal, but actually healthier cereal. And for those, I'm just saying you already have better options. Focus on making the best choice for you. And if enough people see it your way, the market will shift to adapt. In fact, it already is shifting. Why do you think there's even a zero net carb, glycemic neutral, no artificial food dye cereal on the market, or at least popping up on the market now? That said, now pivoting again, the government could step up. Subsidies historically put in place to support farmers and actually prevent Americans from starving are now contributing to chronic diseases, including obesity and diabetes, including in children. The USDA's Farm Commodity Program pays about $6 billion per year in subsidies to commodity crops, including and highlighting corn, wheat, soybeans, and sugar, which are the raw ingredients for ultra-processed food products, the carby sugary substrate onto which the Red40 is eventually dumped. And the SNAP program, formerly called food stamps, that supports 1 in 8 Americans to the cost of $100 billion annually spends about 18% of that $100 billion on sweetened beverages, desserts, salty and sweet snacks, and candy. 18% of $100 billion is $18 billion being spent on that junk. Oh, and SNAP can't be used to buy rotisserie chicken. Go figure. But in summary of my opinion on food dyes, they probably do cause a wide spectrum of problems in certain susceptible individuals. That is dependent on our individual metabolisms, our individual microbiomes. We are all individual. I think it's inappropriate to claim these foodstuffs are proven safe because we haven't asked all the questions. But these issues are avoidable already if you make smart choices based on the options available to you. So with that, I say stay curious, stay reasonable, and as best as you can, kick the sugar and junk food in your health will thank you for it today.
