Kennedy Attacks Food Dyes, Pushes Natural Alternatives

Photo: Wikipedia

India-West News Desk

WASHINGTON, DC – Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is making headlines for launching one of the most sweeping food policy efforts in recent memory — a campaign to rid the U.S. food supply of synthetic dyes. The move, announced on April 22 alongside FDA Commissioner Marty Makary, marks a bold step toward reshaping how food is produced and consumed in America.

At a time when ultra-processed foods dominate grocery aisles and school lunch trays, Kennedy’s vision to cut back on artificial additives and promote natural alternatives is undeniably healthy. Many see it as a much-needed push to encourage food manufacturers to prioritize health over shelf appeal.

The FDA will revoke authorization for two synthetic dyes in the coming months and work with food manufacturers to phase out six others by the end of 2026. The agency also pledged to fast-track the approval of four natural color additives and partner with the NIH to further study the effects of food dyes on children’s health and development.

Kennedy and Makary maintain that the changes will not raise food prices, encouraging manufacturers to switch to ingredients like beet, carrot, and watermelon juice for color.

Kennedy also declared war on sugar. “Sugar is poison,” he said, underscoring his broader goal of reducing chronic disease through food reform.

But while the intent is laudable, critics and many scientists are urging caution, pointing out that the science behind the proposed dye ban remains inconclusive. During the announcement, Makary cited concerns about possible links between synthetic food dyes and conditions like ADHD, obesity, and diabetes — yet he offered few specifics, Reuters noted. He held up a 2007 Lancet study suggesting a connection between dyes and hyperactivity in children, but many experts argue that such findings require more rigorous, contemporary research before guiding national policy.

Critics caution that replacing additives without robust scientific backing could set a troubling precedent. Reformulating food based on incomplete evidence, they say, risks trading one unknown for another — or worse, undermining public trust in health policy.

“We’ve been running one of the largest uncontrolled scientific experiments on children,” Makary said, referencing decades of exposure to artificial dyes. Yet the very agencies tasked with scrutinizing such experiments — the FDA and NIH — are currently facing deep staff cuts and slashed research funding, the New York Times pointed out.

Critics warn that science, not pressure or politics, must lead. “Healthier food is a worthy goal,” said one public health expert to NYT. “But we must be just as rigorous about the solutions as we are about the problems.”