Backlash to artificial dye grows as Kraft ditches coloring for Kool-Aid, Jell-O

Labeling, perception & “natural” vs “artificial”

• Several argue the core issue is labeling, not safety: “Red 4” sounds sinister, whereas “cochineal extract” is more informative and lets people choose (e.g., vegans, allergy‑prone).
• Others dislike umbrella terms like “natural flavors/colors” because they hide actual chemicals and hinder allergy management.
• There’s pushback against the assumption that “natural” means “safer”; examples like cochineal allergies and ricin are cited, and many note that “natural” additives are often highly processed anyway.

Health risks, evidence & precaution

• Some see dyes as a health and safety issue in a context of widespread chronic disease and ultra‑processed diets, arguing that low‑value additives with uncertain long‑term effects should be removed by default (precautionary principle).
• Counter‑arguments: food dyes are among the most extensively tested additives, studied at doses far above human exposure; mixed or weak signals in studies imply any effect is likely very small.
• GRAS (“generally recognized as safe”) and limited pre‑market testing for many additives are criticized as effectively “default allow,” while others defend the regulatory standard as conservative overall.
• Anecdotes claim red dyes are psychoactive or worsen tics/ADHD; others insist such extraordinary claims require stronger evidence, though links between some dyes and behavior have been studied.

Consumer behavior, aesthetics & history of coloring

• Many note we “eat with our eyes”: colored products consistently outsell drab ones, and kids in particular choose bright cereals and drinks.
• Dyes are framed as largely cosmetic marketing that make low‑quality or sugary foods more appealing; critics say focusing on dyes distracts from bigger issues like sugar, quantity, and low fiber.
• Others point out people have colored food for centuries (saffron, turmeric, carmine, squid ink), sometimes mainly for appearance rather than flavor.

Regulation, politics & timelines

• Some are angry that U.S. products lag EU formulations that already use natural colors or none at all, and view a 2027 phase‑out as economically, not medically, driven.
• Defenders cite supply‑chain realities: contracts, ramping new suppliers, retooling plants, and selling through existing inventory.
• RFK Jr.’s role polarizes: some credit him (or Trump) for forcing change that prior administrations avoided; others see the move as scientifically sloppy, lumping all dyes together and driven by “chemicals are bad” politics rather than risk‑based regulation.

Wider critiques: processed food & pet food

• A broader thread attacks the normalization of ultra‑processed, sweetened, preserved foods (and pet foods) across supermarket aisles, arguing that real choice is limited.
• Sugar and subsidies (especially corn syrup) are called out as far more harmful than dyes, with proposals ranging from removing subsidies to sugar taxes modeled on other countries.