Healthier McDonald’s Options Available In Europe, But Not In The US

Authored by Cara Michelle Miller via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

People can get healthier McDonalds in Europe, food activist Vani Hari said at a recent Senate roundtable discussion.

New Africa/Shutterstock

For instance, in the United States, McDonald’s fries contain 11 ingredients, while the UK version has only three, with salt being optional. Hari highlighted this disparity during her testimony at the Sen. Ron Johnson roundtable, American Health and Nutrition: A Second Opinion, revealing how many U.S. foods are laden with unsafe chemicals banned in other Western countries.

The Epoch Times verified that U.S. McDonald’s fries contain ten or more ingredients, while the UK version has three or more ingredients.

How can a food additive be considered risky in other countries yet deemed safe in America?

Legal Loophole Allows Unsafe Ingredients

“The problem is the law—there’s nothing that requires the industry to submit safety data,” Jennifer Pomeranz, associate professor of public health policy and management at NYU School of Global Public Health, told The Epoch Times.

“As a result, companies can just self-regulate and designate ingredients as GRAS [generally recognized as safe] without notifying the FDA or the public.” Her recent research published in the American Journal of Public Health sheds light on this legal loophole, allowing unsafe ingredients in the U.S. food supply.

Europe tends to take a precautionary approach, looking at evidence of harm and protecting their public, whereas the U.S. is more company-friendly, requiring evidence to remove unsafe ingredients from the food supply, she added.

For example, the European Food Safety Authority bans substances like growth hormones and certain artificial colorings based on potential harm. In contrast, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) evaluates food additives through a petition process, relying on the “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) principle, which allows some ingredients to enter the market without thorough testing.

Companies can self-designate substances as GRAS based on their own evaluations, with limited oversight from the FDA. The Epoch Times reached out to the FDA for comments.

Notably, potentially harmful chemicals, like azodicarbonamide, a chemical used in bread—which is linked to cancer in animal studies and banned in several countries—remain legal in the U.S. because of the GRAS principle.

“In other countries, this is the same chemical they use in yoga mats and shoe rubber … when this chemical is heated, studies show that it turns into a carcinogen,” Hari said. This ingredient was previously used in Subway bread until Hari got it removed by petitioning the company.

“There are now hundreds, if not thousands, of substances added to our foods for which the true safety data are unknown to independent scientists, the government, and the public,” said Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, senior author of the study with Pomeranz and director of the Food is Medicine Institute at Tufts University, in a statement.

500 Percent Rise in Food Dye Consumption

Another concern discussed at the Senate roundtable is the significant rise in artificial food dye consumption, particularly among American children.

Consumption of artificial food dyes has increased by 500 percent in the last 50 years, and 43 percent of products marketed to children contain these dyes, Hari said. These dyes have been linked to various health issues, including hyperactivity and allergic reactions, raising serious concerns for parents.

Using Kellogg’s as a case study, Hari pointed out the difference between U.S. and Canadian cereals. The Canadian version of Fruit Loops is colored naturally with juice from watermelons and carrots, while the U.S. version contains artificial dyes and preservatives.

“Kellogg’s announced plans to remove dyes by the end of 2018 but never followed through,” she said, contrasting the neon-colored version with the less-colorful, pastel one.

California passed the School Food Safety Act on Aug. 29, which will restrict several artificial color additives—including blue dye No. 1, red dye No. 40, and titanium dioxide—in foods sold in public K–12 schools, effective Dec. 31, 2027.

Reacting to a petition filed for FD&C Red No. 3, the FDA is reviewing the safety of red dye No. 3. In addition, on Aug. 2, the FDA banned brominated vegetable oil. Companies have until Aug. 2, 2025 to phase it out.

FDA and Congress Can Do More

Hari calls for stricter regulations and greater transparency with ingredient lists to protect consumers, especially children.

“Asking food companies to remove artificial dyes would make an immediate impact on children’s health,” wrote Hari in her email to The Epoch Times. “They don’t need to reinvent the wheel, as they are already using natural alternatives in other countries.”

Pomeranz and Mozaffarian propose several policy recommendations, including requiring companies to notify the FDA of how they determined that a substance is GRAS and sharing their safety data before adding substances to foods. Additionally, increased funding from Congress is needed to allow the FDA to enhance its reach.

They also advocate for a stricter review process for both GRAS ingredients and food additives to ensure that substances such as caffeine, sugar, and salt are safe—not just in small amounts—but also at the higher levels found in many processed foods.

“There is widespread agreement that current [food additive] levels in many products are not ’recognized as safe,‘” Pomeranz said on Sept. 25 during the FDA public meeting on improving the FDA’s review process of food chemicals. Excessive amounts can lead to serious health risks, she said.

“Both the FDA and Congress can do more to enable the FDA to meet its mission of ensuring a safe food supply,” she added.

A Safer Food Supply

As food safety concerns grow,  the FDA is set to launch a new Human Foods Program on Tuesday to reorganize its operations and other improvements, including a proposed post-market review of food additives and GRAS substances to increase transparency and improve safety evaluations.

The FDA has published a paper showing that the program will assess factors such as the potential toxicity of a substance, changes in exposure levels, and their presence in foods consumed by vulnerable populations like infants. Additionally, it will consider new scientific data and public or organizational interest in these chemicals.

The agency would also consider state-level regulations on certain food products.

This approach suggests that state-level actions could influence the FDA’s future assessments. For example, California’s recent restriction on certain food dyes could play a role in future considerations.

Pomeranz said that a more robust review process is needed not just for existing ingredients but also for any new additives.

However, consumers also need to be involved, Hari said. After she uncovered potentially toxic ingredients in Starbucks’ popular pumpkin spice lattes, media attention prompted Starbucks to remove an ammonia-derived ingredient linked to cancer.

Public pressure can help drive changes for safer food options, says Hari, adding, “It’s time for consumers to demand healthier choices and for the FDA to prioritize public health.”