Food safety advocates welcomed the news that U.S. regulators issued Red No.

Red #3 gives thousands of foods, drinks and candies their cherry red hue. After decades of concerns about the additive’s safety, the Food and Drug Administration announced Wednesday that it would ban its use starting in 2027.

Those who want a ban on Red No. 3 requested said there was no reason why it could not be removed from products sooner. It has long been banned in the European Union and some other countries, meaning many companies that sell food and drinks abroad already have recipes they can easily swap for American consumers.

Additionally, in 2023, California became the first state to pass a law banning the sale of Red No. 3 in products sold there. This ban, also set to take effect in 2027, is expected to have a nationwide impact on manufacturers, who are likely to reformulate their recipes for more than just Californians.

“Companies have been on guard about this,” said Dr. Peter Lurie, president and chief executive of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group that will petition the FDA in 2022 to end the use of Red No. 3 has asked. “They had a lot of time to think about this problem and find alternatives.”

According to the Environmental Working Group, a research and health organization that joined the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s petition, Red No. 3 is found in about 3,000 products sold in the United States, including store-bought baked goods, seasonal ones Candy, strawberry meal replacement shakes and more.

Red No. 3 was first approved for use in food more than a century ago. It is made from petroleum and was banned from cosmetics in 1990 after a study found evidence that the dye caused cancer in rats exposed to it in high doses. However, it was allowed to remain in food even as places like the EU banned it in 1994 (except in cocktail cherries) and evidence mounted that it was carcinogenic to animals.

Rep. Jesse Gabriel, a Democrat who introduced California legislation banning Red No. 3 in his state, said a ban on the dye would not result in products being removed from U.S. supermarkets. He said only minor reformulations of the recipes would be needed, many of which are already being implemented in other countries.

“There are many readily available natural alternatives. Companies know this,” he said. “They make the same versions of products we know and love here in the United States in other countries, without the harmful dyes.”

Common alternatives to synthetic red food dyes include beet juice and pomegranate juice — natural options that companies shy away from because they perceive them to be more costly, said consumer protection and environmental attorney Vineet Dubey of Los Angeles-based law firm Custodio & Dubey LLP Law Firm.

“It’s cheaper to use these artificial colors. That’s why these companies use them,” he said. “And if they are allowed to do that for the sake of profit, they will use the cheapest material.”

But Gabriel said research into his legislation reached a different conclusion.

“When we introduced this bill and submitted it to the Legislature, we actually showed that in most cases the safer ingredients are actually cheaper,” he said. “We do not expect food prices to rise.”

Food makers said they would comply with FDA ban on Red No. 3 hold. Ferrara, the producer of fallow sweet corn, which currently has Red No Its product portfolio.

“We are on track to remove food coloring from remaining products by the end of 2026,” Ferrara said in an email. “All of our products are safe to consume and made with only FDA-approved ingredients.”

Just Born, the maker of the Peeps Easter marshmallow candy, said it stopped using Red No. since last Easter. 3 waived.

“Just Born has always evolved with new developments and consumer preferences. “We have removed Red #3 from all PEEPS products,” it said in an email to NBC News on Wednesday.

The Consumer Brands Association, a trade group, said food safety is a top priority for companies, adding in a statement from Sarah Gallo, senior vice president for product policy and federal affairs, that “food and beverage companies continue to follow the latest science and will comply with all food safety regulations to ensure safe and available choices for consumers.”

The International Association of Paint Manufacturers, which represents the paint additives industry, maintained that Red No. 3 was safe for consumption and argued in a statement that the ban was based on evidence of cancer in animals, not humans. Still, the FDA says it cannot approve food additives that have been found to cause cancer in humans or animals.

The FDA does not ban other artificial colors that have been linked to various health problems such as hyperactivity and behavioral problems in children, including Red 40. Lurie said there is a possibility that some manufacturers may simply use Red No. Swap 3 for Red 40.

Regardless, the removal of Red No. 3 is a “big win” for consumers, said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group.

“This shouldn’t be hard for companies,” she said.

“Many of the same multinational food companies that make their products in the U.S. also sell in Europe and have found ways to comply with the ban in Europe and continue to sell bright red foods that are attractive in those markets and have succeeded.” without Red 3,” she added.