Risk communication and the FSA: the food colourings case

Abstract

Food colourings and flavourings have a long history. Spices and preservatives have been added to foods for millennia in order to make them last longer and taste better. Herbs, spices, pepper and salt, and other natural flavours and preservatives remain popular to this day. But over the last century or so the food and drinks industry has in many cases replaced or added to naturally occurring preservatives and colourings with synthetic compounds. All natural and artificial colours, flavours and preservatives that are added to food and drink have been tested and approved as safe by the regulatory authorities in the western world. However, campaigners in several nations, particularly the UK, have attempted to have some artificial colours and preservatives banned on public safety grounds, ranging from alleged skin allergies and asthma to hyperactive children. None of these allegations has been substantiated for any individual substance by the regulatory authorities. This paper evaluates how the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA) communicated the scientific findings of the so‐called Southampton study, which claimed to demonstrate a link between the consumption of a mixture of six artificial colours and one preservative and hyperactivity in children, and was published in September 2007 in the medical journal, The Lancet. The study is based on a content analysis of UK‐based newspapers from March 2007 to July 2008, as well as interviews with staff at the UK FSA, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), industry representatives, academics (including Professor Jim Stevenson who was the supervisor of the food colourings study at Southampton University) and campaign groups.