The following is May 13 testimony from Scott Faber, the Environmental Working Group’s senior vice president for government affairs, before the Pennsylvania Assembly House Consumer Protection, Technology & Utilities Committee, on H.B. 1131 and H.B. 1132. The bills would ban six synthetic food dyes and unhealthy ultra-processed food, or UPF, from schools:
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
My name is Scott Faber, and I am the Environmental Working Group’s senior vice president for government affairs. I also teach food law at Georgetown University Law Center.
Prior to joining EWG, I was the vice president for federal affairs at the Consumer Brands Association.
While I will focus my testimony today on H.B. 1131 and H.B. 1132, I want to share my support for all of the bills in the Healthy PA package.
First, I’d like to share my support for H.B. 1131, which would prohibit our schools from offering foods containing any of six synthetic food dyes.
I’d like to make four main points.
One, the overwhelming evidence shows that these dyes make it harder for some of our kids to learn.
In 2021, scientists in California produced an unprecedented systematic study that looked at human evidence of what happens when kids eat dyes, and animal studies of what happens to their brains. And these scientists conclusively determined that some kids suffer from behavioral effects, and that these dyes change the structure of their brains and how their brains transmit signals.
Two, the FDA has not thoroughly reviewed these dyes since the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, long before toxicological studies could detect their effects on behavior and our kids’ brains. Meetings held in 2011, of the FDA’s Food Advisory Council, and in 2019 of the FDA’s Science Board, were meetings of professionals, not thorough reviews that agencies conduct when deciding whether the chemicals we eat are safe.
Three, banning these colors will have no impact on our school food professionals. Relatively few of the foods sold on a tray or a la carte contain synthetic colors. Food companies can and do reformulate – fast. When other countries required food companies to put a warning on foods, companies quickly replaced synthetic colors with natural colors.
Finally, despite the harms described in the 2021 study, the FDA has no plan to reconsider the safety of these chemicals and is not required to do so. Nor has the FDA reached an agreement with the food industry to phase out these dyes – from school foods or from the foods sold in our stores.
Other states are not waiting for the FDA or the USDA to act. So far, Arizona, California, Utah, Virginia and West Virginia have all banned these dyes from school foods, and more than 30 other states are considering similar legislation.
Now, let me turn to H.B. 1132, which prohibits unhealthy, ultraprocessed foods from being sold in our schools.
Processed foods are part of a healthy diet, and H.B. 1132 does not prohibit schools from offering processed foods on a tray or a la carte. However, as you heard from Dr. Grega, the overwhelming scientific evidence shows that ultraprocessed foods have been linked to serious health harms, including Type 2 diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease.
Ultraprocessed foods, or UPFs, are different from processed foods because they combine industrial ingredients and additives in ways that make foods hyperpalatable. These industrially engineered foods are not simply delicious; they are literally irresistible. That’s because they change the signals that are sent to our brains in ways that trigger our brain’s reward system, increase the speed with which that reward is delivered, and interfere with signals that tell us to stop eating.
Americans are among the world’s biggest consumers of UPFs. As Dr. Grega noted, more than half of the calories we consume are from UPFs – including 67% of the calories eaten by our children.
Fortunately, many of our schools have already moved to eliminate unhealthy UPFs – replacing unhealthy UPFs with healthier processed foods and whole foods from local farms. They’ve shown us we don’t need to make expensive changes to school kitchens to phase out unhealthy UPFs.
While scientists have documented the harms of UPFs in thousands of peer-reviewed studies and meta studies, they have not created a workable, predictable legal definition of UPFs or unhealthy UPFs that can be used by regulators and formulators. That’s the job of policymakers, not scientists, and that is what H.B. 1132 seeks to accomplish. Scientists have done their job, and now it’s up to policymakers to do our jobs.
H.B. 1132 defines an unhealthy, ultraprocessed food as a food that does not meet the FDA’s newly updated “healthy” definition, and includes one or more of the industrial additives scientists have identified as UPF ingredients, including the colors, flavor, sweeteners, emulsifiers, gums and thickening agents that make some foods “ultraprocessed.”
These are two complementary pieces – FDA’s definition of foods that can be marketed as “healthy” because they meet certain nutrition standards, and the list of UPF ingredients identified in H.B. 1132. They can be found in the federal Code of Federal Regulations.
Each UPF ingredient has a unique Chemical Abstract Services number, so every company that makes and offers processed foods to schools is very familiar with the definition in H.B. 1132.
Let me pause and remind you that H.B. 1132 does not ban processed foods from school foods or even ban ultraprocessed foods from school foods.
H.B. 1132 only applies to “unhealthy” ultraprocessed foods that can be easily replaced by other, healthier processed foods. The burden to identify and eliminate these unhealthy UPFs will fall on the food giants that make processed foods, not on our school food professionals.
Let me also remind you that H.B. 1132 applies only to foods sold at schools, when parents and other caregivers aren’t present to help our kids make a healthier choice. H.B. 1132 does not in any way impact what can be sold in stores or restaurants, or what parents choose to pack for their children’s lunch.
As someone who once worked for the food industry, I am confident that food companies can meet the challenges posed by H.B. 1131 and H.B. 1132. Like you, my former colleagues in the food industry recognize that schools are special places, and that is why policymakers and food companies have for decades worked together to make sure that our children are being offered only the most nutritious options when they are at school.
Before I close, I just want to reiterate my support for the rest of the Healthy PA package. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and I am happy to take your questions.
