Dangerous additives are present in food sold in Canada
Executive summary
Health Canada requires pre‑market safety assessments for food additives and maintains Lists of Permitted Food Additives; it will not authorize an additive or use that would make food unsafe and reassesses additives when new science emerges [1][2][3]. Recent regulatory amendments changed which substances count as additives (bringing essential oils and natural extractives into scope) and have created practical uncertainty for some long‑used ingredients because no new entries had been added to the Lists by April 2025 [4].
1. The official safety framework: rigorous on paper
Canada’s system centers on Health Canada’s Food and Nutrition Directorate and its Bureau of Chemical Safety, which evaluates new food additive submissions by looking at exposure, toxicology, allergenicity, chemistry and other disciplines before an additive is authorized; already‑permitted additives are re‑assessed when new evidence arises [1][2]. The Lists of Permitted Food Additives are Health Canada’s public repository and are the mechanism by which approvals, limits and permitted uses are communicated to industry and consumers [3].
2. Recent rule changes that shifted the ground
Regulatory amendments published in late 2024 and implemented in 2025 removed exemptions for certain substances — notably essential oils, natural extractives and oleoresins — so that when used for a non‑flavouring or nutritive technical effect they now fall within the legal definition of “food additive” and therefore must comply with the Lists of Permitted Food Additives [4]. That change has regulatory reach beyond safety assessments: it means longstanding formulations may now require formal listing even if their composition hasn’t changed [4].
3. Where the concern about “dangerous additives” comes from
Public worries often arise when rules change, when regulators expand scrutiny, or when high‑profile removals occur: for example, Health Canada removed brominated vegetable oil (BVO) from permitted uses and major outlets reported BVO will not be present in grocery products after Aug. 30, 2025 [5]. But the federal stance is explicit: additives in Canada must not make food unsafe and Health Canada will restrict or remove uses when safety concerns merit it [1][2].
4. Practical uncertainty versus proven hazard
Industry and legal analysts note a different problem than toxicity: the April 2025 regulatory shift created uncertainty because no new essential oils, extractives or oleoresins had yet been added to the Lists, and Health Canada paused issuing Letters of No Objection for some processing aids — leaving companies unsure whether long‑used substances are technically permitted [4]. That regulatory gap is not the same as evidence of widespread dangerous additives; it is an administrative and compliance challenge documented by Gowling WLG [4].
5. Numbers and scope: additives are common but regulated
Mainstream reporting notes that more than 850 additives are used in Canadian food manufacturing to perform functions such as preservation, texture, colour and nutrition enhancement; many are considered safe when used within specified limits under Canada’s system [5][3]. Health Canada’s public lists and Notices of Proposal are the channels by which the department signals intent to modify permissions, allowing public comment and further scientific consideration [3].
6. Competing viewpoints and implicit agendas
Government sources emphasize a science‑based, precautionary process and the authority to ban or limit additives when warranted [1][2]. Industry and law firms flag compliance complexity and uncertainty following the regulatory changes, framing the issue as one of administrative clarity and market impact rather than a sudden toxic risk [4]. Trade and consulting outlets track list changes and interpret them for affected companies, which may emphasise business continuity [6][7].
7. What the reporting does not say
Available sources do not provide evidence in these materials that a broad class of currently permitted additives is demonstrably causing harm in Canada; instead, sources document process, lists, regulatory amendments and specific decisions like the removal of BVO [1][2][5][4]. Available sources do not mention consumer‑level exposure studies showing systemic health harms tied to the full range of permitted additives (not found in current reporting).
8. What consumers and policymakers can do next
Consumers seeking lower additive exposure can check product labels (industry must declare additives) and contact manufacturers; Health Canada and the CFIA provide the lists and guidance for labelling and synonyms [8][3]. Policymakers and industry need clearer transitional measures and faster listing or guidance for substances newly captured as “additives” to remove the regulatory uncertainty highlighted by legal analysis [4].
Limitations: this analysis uses only the supplied documents. It presents Health Canada’s stated regulatory process, documented rule changes and industry/legal commentary about uncertainty; it does not include independent toxicology studies or consumer exposure research beyond what these sources explicitly report [1][2][4][3][5].