WK Kellogg said Thursday that it will remove artificial colors from all its cereals by the end of this year.

The change comes a year ahead of schedule. Kellogg said last August that it would remove synthetic dyes from its cereals by the end of 2027.

But the company said Thursday it has identified fruit- and vegetable-based juices that will give cereals like Froot Loops and Apple Jacks their distinctive colors. The Battle Creek, Michigan-based company said it has also invested in equipment that will allow it to transition to natural colors.

  • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Categorically, yes, but that doesn’t change the US needing to get these dyes out of its foods yesterday. Within the health catastrophe Trump, RFK Jr., their followers, etc. are creating, I’ll gladly take and ride this one point we can apparently all agree on that these dyes serve no good purpose and need to go.


    Edit: And I wouldn’t even stipulate “if you eat it regularly”. It’s enriched with a token amount of Vitamins and minerals of course, but that’s practically a participation trophy for cereals (seriously, the micronutrient profile is fucking pathetic); everything else about it is utter trash, and it’s terrible for you from the jump.


    Edit 2: That said, the comment below about cancer link is misinformation in that the science currently does not support said link.

    • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      Removing dyes from overly sugary cereals is rearranging deckchairs on the titanic. Its completely missing the point of what makes these foods bad for you.

        • protist@retrofed.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 days ago

          Do you have a source for this? As someone with a young child, I’ve gone out of my way to research and avoid artificial dyes, and cancer literally never showed on my radar

          • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            They’re wrong. Please see my comment. There are potential other problems with dyes (the main one that’s more concerning is risk of ADHD), but their statement about cancer is horseshit – not because it’s impossible they cause cancer but because “directly linked and have been for years” is not supported by science in 2026.

            Good for you for looking out for your kid. ❤️

              • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                5 days ago

                Yes, because it’s a single study on rats from the 1990s. When we’re talking about the health effects in humans and you show up talking about a “direct link to cancer”, any reasonable reader – because again, “humans aren’t rats” – would believe you’re talking about a direct link to cancer in humans.

                “Alcohol has been directly linked to literally being dissolved alive.”

                “Really?”

                “Well in bacteria, yes.”

          • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            5 days ago

            What they weren’t telling you is that it’s one study from the 1990s in rats, then in another comment they just throw in “granted it’s in rats” like that doesn’t make all the difference in the world.

        • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          This is misinformation. The evidence is so tenuous that the link may as well not exist. Other problems perhaps, but not this one – at least it’s certainly not well-studied enough to go throwing around “directly linked to cancer and have been for years.”

          Please have some level of compunction about throwing serious medical claims around.

            • TheTechnician27@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              5 days ago

              You know, generally it’s implied you mean “in humans” when we’re talking about… the health effects in humans.

              “People aren’t rats”, to quote a “no-fucking-shit” passage from the article that I hope is obvious to you too.

    • darkdemize@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      5 days ago

      I won’t begrudge someone who eats a bowl of cereal occasionally as a treat any more than I would someone who has an occasional bowl of ice cream. Both are OK in moderation but not great if you’re eating it everyday. And yes, I’ll take an improvement vs doing nothing, but no one should be fooling themselves that this change makes sugary cereals ok for daily consumption.

    • Zidane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Now we just need everyone to stop putting paprika into fucking everything for color (I’m allergic, not to color but paprika)

      Weird downboats but okay, you would be very surprised with how much paprika is in things

      • protist@retrofed.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 days ago

        Does that mean you’re allergic to peppers? Isn’t paprike just dried and powdered red pepper?