Should I Throw Out My Kid’s Froot Loops?

This story originally appeared in Kids Today, Vox’s newsletter about kids, for everyone. Sign up here for future editions.

Last week, the Food and Drug Administration announced a ban on a food dye called Red No. 3, which has been linked to cancer in animal studies.

The news comes on the heels of a bill that California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed in September that bans six other food dyes from school cafeteria menus, largely over concerns that the dyes could cause behavior problems in kids. Meanwhile, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick to run the Department of Health and Human Services, has also singled out dyes, pledging in October to “tell the cereal companies: Take all the dyes out of their food.”

All this can be confusing, even for people who consider themselves reasonably savvy consumers of food and science news (read: me). Do we need to throw out all our Ring Pops? Why is RFK Jr., noted vaccine skeptic and leader of the Trumpian “Make America Healthy Again” movement, on the same side as Newsom, a vocal Trump opponent, and some very mainstream epidemiologists and public health experts? Let’s break it all down.

What does the science say about food dyes?

Synthetic food dyes are liquids or powders added to foods and drinks to make them look cool; nine are currently in use in the US (it’ll be eight when the Red No. 3 ban takes effect in 2027). The dyes show up in everything from Doritos to pickles — RFK Jr. has been especially critical of Froot Loops. 

To understand the controversy around these ingredients, it helps to understand the history of the FDA’s Red No. 3 ban. In the 1980s, researchers found that consuming Red No. 3 led to an increased risk of thyroid cancer in male rats. Human studies have not shown such a risk, and the FDA says the danger to rats has to do with aspects of rat biology that don’t exist in humans. 

But in 2022, food watchdog groups petitioned the FDA, arguing that the agency was legally required to ban any substance shown to cause cancer in animals. Last week, the FDA agreed. There’s no new data, and still no evidence that red candy, icing, or cherries cause cancer in people, but the additive will be phased out of the food supply over the next two years.

The science on dyes and behavior is more complicated. Researchers have long been concerned that the food colorings might exacerbate symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In 2021, a review of the available research conducted by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment found evidence that dyes were “associated with adverse neurobehavioral effects, such as inattentiveness, hyperactivity, and restlessness in sensitive children.” It’s not clear what makes a child “sensitive” to these dyes — the researchers found effects in children both with and without an ADHD diagnosis. And while one particular dye, Red No. 40, has gotten the most attention with respect to ADHD symptoms, some studies look at several dyes together, making it hard to know which one is producing the effect.

More research is needed, but some experts say there’s enough there to suggest some restrictions on synthetic dyes in the food supply. “Certainly within our schools, we shouldn’t be promoting foods that have these,” Asa Bradman, a professor of public health at University of California Merced who worked on the 2021 review, told me.

How the conversation around dyes got so overblown

But that nuanced message isn’t what you’ll find on large swathes of TikTok and Instagram, where influencers call dyes “toxic” and “poison” and instruct parents to eliminate all dyes from their children’s diets to radically improve their behavior. The conversation around dyes has become part of a much bigger discourse around food, children, and health, with RFK Jr. and some “clean” eating influencers arguing that parents need to cut a laundry list of ingredients out of their family’s diet in order to keep their kids healthy.

Cutting out dyes won’t make all kids better-behaved, because not every child is sensitive to dye in the first place. And severely restricting foods has its own risks, Christy Harrison, a registered dietitian and host of the podcast Rethinking Wellness, told me. It’s one thing just to keep your home pantry stocked with dye-free snacks (though they tend to be more expensive). But “when you get into people who are like, ‘I’m reading every label, I’m not letting anything touch my kid’s lips that has a dye in it,’” Harrison said, “I think that is setting up kids for a pretty disordered relationship with food.”

A restrictive diet can also cause unnecessary fear, said Zoë Bisbing, a psychotherapist specializing in disordered eating. She’s seen families whose kids have panic attacks at birthday parties because they’re not sure if they’re allowed to eat the cake, she told me. “Stress and anxiety, whether it’s the parent’s or the child’s — this is not good for health,” Bisbing said.

Restricting dyes and other ingredients targeted by RFK Jr. and wellness influencers can also be a “gateway” to embracing more harmful beliefs, like the idea that vaccines are dangerous, Harrison said. “It’s just important to know that grains of truth can coexist with misinformation and conspiracy theories.”

There’s also some ableism in the idea that if we got rid of the dyes in food, we’d eliminate ADHD, Bisbing said — a neurotype that’s likely existed for millennia and that comes with both difficulties and benefits. It’s worth noting that RFK Jr.’s questioning of vaccines is also rooted in the debunked idea that they cause autism, another form of neurodivergence. “As long as we look at ADHD and autism as problems to be solved, we’re really spending our energy on the wrong thing,” Bisbing said.

Conversations about kids and food are likely to grow louder if RFK Jr. is confirmed. But amid the noise, families can still foster a healthy, relaxed attitude toward eating, experts say. For Harrison, it’s pretty simple: “Allowing your kids some flexibility, and having a home where all foods are accepted and all foods are good.”

What I’m reading

The Trump administration has announced that federal immigration authorities can arrest people at schools, reversing a long-held policy of avoiding these areas. Advocates are worried the change will make some immigrant parents afraid to take their kids to school, leading them to miss out on education.

School lunch debt continued to climb in 2024. However, eight states now have universal free school meal programs, and a ninth, New York, could soon join them.

Personal-finance influencers are convincing kids they can “attract wealth” with a “growth mindset,” and it’s messing up their ideas about work, money, and life.

My older kid is now exclusively consuming Gravity Falls-related content, including the graphic novel Gravity Falls: Lost Legends. 

From my inbox

Earlier this month, I wrote about legislation that aims to keep kids off social media, often with the goal of protecting their mental health. But reader Christopher Ferguson, a psychology professor at Stetson University, notes that in an analysis he performed with colleagues, “we concluded that, as of yet, the evidence was unable to link social media use to youth mental health, contrary to many public beliefs.”

And last week, after I wrote about the kids whose schools have been destroyed by the California wildfires, a reader shared this list of learning specialists and tutors offering pro bono services for kids affected by the fires. This list, meanwhile, includes therapists who are offering help.

Thanks to everyone who has written to share thoughts and resources, and as always, you can reach me at anna.north@vox.com.