Many foods and cosmetics have additives that we want to avoid at all costs.
Every time we put a packaged potato omelet, hummus or moisturizing cream in the shopping cart, we incorporate dozens of substances into our body that often go unnoticed despite appearing on the label. The preservativesdyes, emulsifiers or sun filters are part of the usual composition of thousands of products that we buy in supermarkets. His presence responds to a legitimate industrial logic: it is necessary to extend the shelf life of a food or stabilize the texture of a cosmetic. The problem is that the regulations that regulate these additives almost always advance behind scientific knowledge. An additive can take decades to be approved and in widespread use before scientific studies force authorities to reopen its file. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) periodically reevaluates these compounds, but its way of working requires accumulating solid evidence and sustains years of continuous exposure before any regulatory change. This disconnection does not at all mean that everything permitted is automatically dangerous. In fact, the vast majority of authorized additives are supported by decades of toxicological studies. Even so, it is in consumers’ interest to know which substances have generated the most scientific controversy, in which products they appear most frequently, and which institutions have focused on them. Preservatives that are already under discussion Sodium benzoate (E211) is one of the most commonly used preservatives in packaged potato chips, pickles, sauces and soft drinks. The EFSA has reviewed your security on several occasions, the last in 2016, and has concluded that within the authorized levels it does not raise concerns about genotoxicity (the ability of a substance to damage the genetic material of a cell). It has warned, however, that certain population groups can easily exceed the acceptable daily intake. A quick note before we move forward: part of the controversy about this additive comes from research such as those of Professor Peter Piperfrom the University of Sheffield (United Kingdom), who has documented damage to mitochondrial DNA of cells exposed to sodium benzoate in in vitro assays. EFSA opts for regulatory prudence, while certain academic groups insist on stricter scrutiny Potassium sorbate (E202) follows a similar logic. It frequently appears in hummus, cheeses, yogurts or wines, and acts as an antifungal. The EFSA has reevaluated it in 2015 and again in 2019setting an acceptable daily intake together with sorbic acid of 3 mg per kilo of body weight per day. A study published in In Vitro Toxicology evaluated its genotoxic potential in human lymphocytes cultured in the laboratory, without finding relevant effects at the concentrations tested, which reinforces the official position of the agency. Another relevant note: both preservatives share the same pattern. No reference institution has classified them as carcinogenic, but there is no unanimity regarding their complete long-term safety. The EFSA opts for the regulatory prudencewhile certain academic groups insist on stricter scrutiny, especially in sensitive populations, such as children or people with an aspirin allergy. However, we are interested in putting these figures in context: the real exposure of those who eat packaged potato omelettes several times a week is well below the thresholds at which adverse effects have been observed in the most alarmist studies. The additives most highlighted by science Beyond preservatives, there are other additives that have received much stronger regulatory attention. The clearest case is that of titanium dioxide (E171), a white dye used for decades in candy, chewing gum and some cosmetics. The EFSA concluded in 2021 that its genotoxicity cannot be ruled out, especially due to its ability to accumulate in the body, which has led to the European Union to ban its use as a food additive from 2022. Even so, it is still allowed in cosmetics, such as sunscreens. The antioxidants BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole, E320) and BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene, E321), present in snacks, cereals and some cosmetics, illustrate well the nuances of this type of evaluations. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified BHA in group 2B as possible carcinogen for humans. BHT, on the other hand, remains in group 3, not classifiable due to insufficient evidence. The International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified BHA in group 2B as a possible human carcinogen. The European Commission has also placed BHA as a priority substance for endocrine disruption, while BHT only arouses similar suspicions in the scientific literature, without an equivalent institutional classification. Long-chain parabens in cosmetics follow a similar path: several of them are banned in the European Union since 2014 by decision of its scientific consumer safety committee. Sodium nitrite (E250), common in sausages and processed meats, closes the list with the best documented case: the IARC classified processed meat as a group 1 carcinogen in 2015, especially due to the formation of nitrosamines when cooked at high temperature. In the following table we summarize these six cases and identify the institution that has indicated the risk of each of them and the effects described in the scientific literature: Additive Where do we find it? Institution that has indicated the risk Described effects E211 (sodium benzoate) Packaged potato omelettes, pickles, sauces, soft drinks EFSA (2016 revision); University of Sheffield Overcoming the IDA in sensitive groups; damage to mitochondrial DNA in in vitro studies E202 (potassium sorbate) Hummus, cheeses, yogurts, wines EFSA (2015 and 2019 revisions) Possible cellular inflammation in animal models E171 (titanium dioxide) Candies, gum, sunscreen EFSA (2021 opinion) Genotoxicity not ruled out; banned as a food additive in the EU from 2022 E320 (BHA) / E321 (BHT) Snacks, cereals, some cosmetics IARC (group 2B for the BHA); European Commission (priority endocrine disruptor for BHA) BHA, possible carcinogen and hormone disruptor; BHT, similar suspicions without equivalent classification Long chain parabens Creams, shampoos, cosmetics Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (EU) Hormonal disruption; several banned in cosmetics since 2014 E250 (sodium nitrite) Sausages, processed meats IARC (group 1 for processed meat, 2015) Formation of carcinogenic nitrosamines when cooked at high temperatures Image | Kenneth Surillo More information | EFSA | European Union | IARC In Xataka … Read more