Sudan 1

[sglazier]

Is there a real risk with this banned dye getting into all the supermarket products? I gather it was used to dye the chilli powder in worcestershire sauce which was used to flavour various foods. Given the tiny amounts of chilli used in the sauce and the tiny amount of sauce in each product isn't this all a bit of an overreaction? I would like to know how long Sudan 1 has been banned in the EU as well.

[purplefish]

i wouldn't call helping prevent unnecessary cancer overreacting.....

[Rabelais]

Since 30 July 2003, consignments of dried and crushed or ground chilli coming into the country must be accompanied by an analytical report showing they have been tested and are free of Sudan I (European Commission Decision 2004/92/EC) but Sudan 1 has been know as a potential carcinogen since a study in 1982. As to the threat level it is unknown, but the reason it is unknown is because it is so very very tiny. To allow it to impinge on your life in any way shape or for is like taking an umbrella where ever you go because there is a statistical chance in this infinite universe that it will start raining Manx cats. Like mobile phone masts, the MMR vaccine and asian bird flul people are up in arms about the danger they're in when they are many millions of times more likely to be killed by their toaster or even their toilet. But it hasn't see fit to call for a ban of these more dangerous known killers. The reason for this is that people, taken enmass are pretty ignorant, at assesing risk and what effect it should play in their life.

[kick3m0n]

Rabelais - loving your answer.

the scientific evidence that Sudan 1 is carcinogenic is likely to have come from tests performed on rats and mice.  tests that are required by law before any chemical/dye etc is allowed to be used in the UK for any product that we may come into contact with (foods, cleaning products, plant feed, medicines etc). These animals would have been given this chemical as part of their daily diets for their lifetime (1 or 2 years) and a huge amount of data on their condition in life and after death would then be evaluated.  This is where the conclusion that it is a carcinogen is likey to have been reached (tho apologies, I've not checked that).  This effect would be seen after intake of relatively large amounts of the chemical (relative to likely human intake)  and over a very long period of time (equivalent of decades of our lives).  To have eaten one or two meals/sauces with trace amounts of this chemical in it is not in any way going to increase your likelihood of getting cancer.  This chemical was not intentionally added to these, or any other products we eat, and so prolonged exposure in humans via this route is not possible.