The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is taking steps to ban BHA, a food additive used in processed foods such as meats and bread.
BHA (or butylated hydroxyanisole) has been used in foods for decades. The FDA first included it on the list of “generally recognized as safe” substances in 1958 and approved it as a food additive in 1961. It is used to prevent fats and oils in foods from spoiling and can appear in products such as frozen meals, breakfast cereals, cookies, ice cream, and some meat products.
Now, the agency has announced that it is launching a new review into the safety of this chemical, pointing to long-standing concerns that the food additive could cause cancer in humans.
In the 1990s, the National Toxicology Program, a federal program that reviews whether certain chemicals may be harmful, said BHA was “reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans,” based on animal studies. It has been included on California’s Proposition 65 list of known carcinogens.
There are some studies linking BHA to cancer in animals dating back to the 1980s and 1990s, although human research is scarce.
As part of its review, the FDA has announced that it will issue a request for information asking the public and industry to submit data on how BHA is used, and whether it is safe.
“This reassessment marks the end of the ‘trust us’ era in food safety,” Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in a statement.
Review aligns with agenda Make America Healthy Again led by Kennedy, who has focused on clamping down on chemicals in food.
Last year, Kennedy announced a plan to phase out all artificial colors from the food supply by the end of this year, claiming they are responsible for behavioral problems in children, including hyperactivity, a relationship the FDA has said it is monitoring but which science has not established.
Since then, the FDA has approved “natural” dyes, such as beet red, and expanded the use of spirulina extract, an existing color additive derived from a type of algae.
Marion Nestle, professor emeritus of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, said she wants to know how the FDA plans to evaluate the safety of BHA.
Previous toxicological studies on BHA have been based on laboratory tests and animal experiments, and it is not always clear to what extent those results can be extrapolated to humans, he said.
Human studies aren’t really possible, he added, noting that they would take too long, cost too much and raise important ethical questions.
Still, Nestle applauded the FDA’s decision to launch a new review of BHA’s safety. He stated that this chemical has long been on the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s list of “substances to avoid.” The center is a food safety monitoring group.
“It’s about time the FDA took care of it,” Nestlé said. “It will be interesting to see what the researchers conclude.”
The Consumer Brand Association, an industry trade group, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
