On 2017 Aug 04, L Lefferts commented:

This study funded by members of the International Association of Color Manufacturers (IACM) and written by IACM staff, members, and consultants touting the safety of food dyes is so riddled with inaccuracies and misleading statements that it should be retracted and disregarded. Each of its conclusions is incorrect. The Corrigendum only partially and inadequately addresses the errors. Bastaki et al. mischaracterizes the relationship between the study’s exposure estimates and actual concentrations measured analytically by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), systematically underestimates food dye exposure, and relies on acceptable daily intake (ADI) estimates that are based on outdated animal studies that are incapable of detecting the kinds of adverse behavioral effects reported in multiple double-blind clinical trials in children. Bastaki ignores the nine recent reviews (including three meta-analyses) drawing from over 30 such double-blind clinical trials that all conclude that excluding food dyes, or adherence to a diet that eliminates food dyes as well as certain other foods and ingredients, reduces adverse behavior in some children (Arnold et al. 2012, Arnold et al. 2013, Faraone and Antshel 2014, Nigg et al. 2012, Nigg and Holton 2014, Schab and Trinh 2004, Sonuga-Barke et al. 2013, Stevens et al. 2011, Stevenson et al. 2014). While Bastaki et al. has been revised to delete the incorrectly reported doses used in the Southampton study, it makes misleading statements about the Southampton study.

Each erroneous conclusion is addressed in turn, in a letter sent to the editor, signed by myself, Lisa Lefferts, Senior Scientist, Center for Science in the Public Interest, and Jim Stevenson, Emeritus Professor of Developmental psychopathology, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, and available at <https://cspinet.org/sites/default/files/attachment/dyes Bastaki LTE.pdf>.

On 2017 Aug 04, L Lefferts commented:

This study funded by members of the International Association of Color Manufacturers (IACM) and written by IACM staff, members, and consultants touting the safety of food dyes is so riddled with inaccuracies and misleading statements that it should be retracted and disregarded. Each of its conclusions is incorrect. The Corrigendum only partially and inadequately addresses the errors. Bastaki et al. mischaracterizes the relationship between the study’s exposure estimates and actual concentrations measured analytically by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), systematically underestimates food dye exposure, and relies on acceptable daily intake (ADI) estimates that are based on outdated animal studies that are incapable of detecting the kinds of adverse behavioral effects reported in multiple double-blind clinical trials in children. Bastaki ignores the nine recent reviews (including three meta-analyses) drawing from over 30 such double-blind clinical trials that all conclude that excluding food dyes, or adherence to a diet that eliminates food dyes as well as certain other foods and ingredients, reduces adverse behavior in some children (Arnold et al. 2012, Arnold et al. 2013, Faraone and Antshel 2014, Nigg et al. 2012, Nigg and Holton 2014, Schab and Trinh 2004, Sonuga-Barke et al. 2013, Stevens et al. 2011, Stevenson et al. 2014). While Bastaki et al. has been revised to delete the incorrectly reported doses used in the Southampton study, it makes misleading statements about the Southampton study.

Each erroneous conclusion is addressed in turn, in a letter sent to the editor, signed by myself, Lisa Lefferts, Senior Scientist, Center for Science in the Public Interest, and Jim Stevenson, Emeritus Professor of Developmental psychopathology, School of Psychology, University of Southampton, and available at <https://cspinet.org/sites/default/files/attachment/dyes Bastaki LTE.pdf>.