Home Blog Page 4

Teleworking do’s and don’ts …

Working remotely during COVID and after COVID has its pros and cons.

During teleworking, it is essential to maintain a productive and professional environment. Here are a few dos and don’ts to keep in mind. Do establish a dedicated workspace that is free from distractions and comfortable for extended periods of work. Do maintain regular communication with your colleagues and supervisors through video conferences, emails, and instant messaging platforms. Do dress appropriately, as if you were going to the office, to set a professional tone and mindset. Do take regular breaks to stretch, relax, and avoid burnout. Don’t neglect your self-care routine, including proper nutrition, exercise, and sleep. Don’t let household chores or personal tasks interfere with your work hours. Don’t forget to set clear boundaries between work and personal life to maintain a healthy work-life balance. Don’t hesitate to ask for support or clarification when needed. By following these guidelines, you can optimize your teleworking experience.

Social Security Overpays Billions to People, Many on Disability. Then It Demands the Money Back.

By David Hilzenrath and Jodie Fleischer, Cox Media Group SEPTEMBER 15, 2023

Justina Worrell, 47, works part time as a kitchen helper in an Ohio nursing home. She has cerebral palsy, an intellectual disability, and a cardiac condition that required she get an artificial heart valve at age 20.

A year ago, she was earning $862 a month and receiving about $1,065 in monthly Social Security disability benefits when a letter arrived from the federal government. The Social Security Administration had been overpaying her, the letter said, and wanted money back.

Within 30 days, it said, she should mail the government a check or money order.

For $60,175.90.

“Social Security should be to help people, not to destroy them,” said Addie Arnold, Worrell’s aunt and caregiver.

The Social Security Administration is trying to reclaim billions of dollars from many of the nation’s poorest and most vulnerable — payments it sent them but now says they never should have received.

During the 2022 fiscal year, the agency clawed back $4.7 billion of overpayments, while another $21.6 billion remained outstanding, according to a report by SSA’s inspector general.

One consequence is a costly collection effort for the government and a potentially devastating ordeal for the beneficiary.

“We have an overpayment crisis on our hands,” said Rebecca Vallas, a senior fellow at the Century Foundation think tank.

“Overpayments push already struggling beneficiaries even deeper into poverty and hardship, which is directly counterproductive to the goals” of safety-net programs.

The Social Security Administration declined an interview request from KFF Health News and Cox Media Group and would field questions only submitted by email.

The agency declined to say how many people have been asked to repay overpayments.

“We do not report on the number of debtors,” spokesperson Nicole Tiggemann said in a statement.

The agency rejected a May 2022 Freedom of Information Act request for documentation of every overpayment notice sent over several years, and a March 2023 appeal is pending.

Jack Smalligan of the Urban Institute, who has done research on Social Security, estimated that millions of people have received notices saying the agency overpaid them.

Most are on disability, and many cannot afford to repay the government, Smalligan said.

Overpayments can result from Social Security making a mistake or from beneficiaries failing to comply with requirements, intentionally or otherwise. But much of the fault lies within the system — for example:

  • Rules are complex and hard to follow.
  • Limits on what beneficiaries can save or own have not been adjusted for inflation in decades.
  • The Social Security Administration does not have adequate staffing to keep up with its workload, much of which is done by hand.
  • The system has built-in lags in checking information such as beneficiaries’ income and relies heavily on data submitted by beneficiaries themselves.

That’s the picture that emerges from agency employees, advocates for the disabled, policy research, SSA publications, reports by the inspector general, records of individual cases, and interviews with more than a dozen people in five states who received repayment notices.

The Social Security Administration is required to be a good steward of the money entrusted to it. That means keeping overpayments to a minimum — and recovering them when they happen, the inspector general has written.

When the agency determines it has overpaid, SSA can ultimately reclaim money from beneficiaries by, for instance, reducing or stopping their monthly benefit payments, garnishing wages, and intercepting federal tax refunds.

The agency tracks its overpayments through quarterly “payment integrity scorecards.” In the most recent scorecard for one Social Security program, the agency said $265 million of overpayments in the 2022 fiscal year were “within the agency’s control.” In other words, the agency blamed itself.

“We were aware of information but failed to take action, or we took incorrect action when the recipient or third-party provided requested information,” the scorecard said.

A much larger source of overpayments in that program, the agency said, was that beneficiaries did not report information, such as changes in their wages or assets.

By the time the agency catches a mistake, years can pass. In the meantime, the beneficiary is likely to have spent the money, and the amount involved can grow to overwhelming proportions.

“We understand getting notice of an overpayment may be unsettling or unclear and we work with people to navigate the overpayment process,” Tiggemann, the agency spokesperson, said by email.

The agency’s payment accuracy is high, Tiggemann said, but given the volume of payments it issues — almost $1.2 trillion in the 2021 fiscal year — “even small error rates add up to substantial improper payment amounts.”

Tiggemann noted that the SSA is developing a program to tap payroll data from outside sources. The agency plans to use that information “when appropriate” to automatically adjust the amounts it pays beneficiaries, she said.

Congress authorized that project almost eight years ago.

Tangled Safety Nets

When people hear “Social Security,” they may think of retirement benefits — the monthly payments the government issues to millions of retired workers and surviving family members under the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance program.

But the Social Security Administration does much more than issue those checks, and its clawbacks for overpayment commonly involve payments under other programs with complicated eligibility requirements.

With certain benefits, how much money — if any — beneficiaries are due each month can change as their circumstances change.

Most of the overpayments involve the Supplemental Security Income program, which provides money to people with little or no income or other resources who are disabled, blind, or at least 65.

In the 2021 fiscal year, more than 7% of that program’s outlays were overpayments, according to the agency’s most recent annual financial report.

Some overpayments involve the Disability Insurance program, which assists disabled workers and their dependents.

Lori Cochran, a beneficiary disabled by multiple sclerosis, said she got tripped up by a life insurance policy she took over from her mother.

After she reviewed her finances with a Social Security representative, she recounted, she received a letter saying she owed $27,000.

“I started having, like, heart palpitations,” she recalled.

Cochran said she didn’t know the insurance policy had a cash value of $4,000.

The agency told her that, for every month she held the policy, she wasn’t entitled to any of her $914 monthly benefit, she said. The agency said it would recoup the $27,000 by deducting $91.40 from each of her future checks. At that rate, she would be paying it back “way into my elderly age,” she said.

Cochran has asked SSA to reconsider. In the meantime, she cashed out the life insurance policy — only to learn that, instead, she could have signed a paper saying she had no intention of cashing it out.

“So now I’m left with no life insurance,” she said. “When I die, my daughter will have no money to bury me.”

A ‘Kafkaesque Minefield’

If beneficiaries believe that an overpayment wasn’t their fault, that the claim is unfair, or that paying the money back would cause hardship, they can ask the SSA to waive repayment.

They can also negotiate to repay what they owe gradually.

Cheryl Bates-Harris of the National Disability Rights Network recommended that people who receive overpayment notices appeal, because the information in the notices may be inaccurate.

But trying to resolve an overpayment involves plunging into a “Kafkaesque minefield,” said Darcy Milburn, director of Social Security and health care policy at the Arc, which advocates for people with disabilities.

Another beneficiary named Lori described her journey through the minefield on the condition that her last name be withheld. She provided a copy of an administrative law judge’s ruling in her case.

In 2017, SSA informed her that, since 2000, she had been overpaid $126,612, according to the judge’s ruling.

“I almost threw up when I opened that letter,” she said. “Myself and my husband were like, we were like frantic.”

According to the judge’s ruling, the government based its calculation on her receipt of workers’ compensation benefits as well as disability benefits. She argued that she had told the SSA about the workers’ comp. Lori worked for the U.S. Postal Service until she injured her back.

As her struggle unfolded, the government reduced her monthly benefit checks and then stopped them. She and her husband sold their car and their house and moved from Florida to Georgia, where the cost of living was lower.

She said she ran up credit card debt and called lawyer after lawyer but was told no attorney would help because there was no money to be made from a Social Security case. Then she found one through legal aid.

After six years of battling SSA, including multiple appeals, Lori prevailed. An administrative judge ruled in her favor and wiped away the debt.

Lori had spent her benefit money in the belief she was entitled to it, the judge wrote, and “requiring repayment would be against equity and good conscience.”

A family in Covington, Georgia, had a similar experience.

In 2018, Matt Cooper was shot in the face while working as a police officer there. Since then, he and his wife, Kristen, have depended on Social Security payments to help support their two young children.

“Every decision that we made for our family was based on the benefits that we were supposed to receive,” Kristen Cooper said.

But the Social Security Administration recently demanded the family pay back $30,000 and reduced the children’s benefits. Cooper said the agency failed to correctly include her husband’s workers’ compensation in its calculations.

“Situations like this come up and it just brings back a level of anger and just the need to protect my family,” she said. “The system has definitely let us down.”

Too Late

Alex Hubbard, 30, has autism and said he works in a mailroom to keep busy.

“I like to be busy because I don’t want to be bored at home,” he said.

In 2019, Hubbard received an overpayment notice for $11,111.43.

“I’m supposed to report my wages, but I just don’t know how, how it works,” said the Seattle resident.

The agency has cut off his benefits, Hubbard said, but it would have been better if it had stopped them before he owed all that money.

“They should have let me know, like, years back that I owed back that much,” Hubbard said.

Now, the agency is trying to collect the money from his mother, who is unable to manage his benefits since having a stroke, Hubbard said.

Dealing with the Social Security Administration can be exasperating, beneficiaries said.

Letters from the agency don’t provide clear explanations, and, if people on the receiving end of overpayment notices can get through to a human, agency employees give inconsistent answers, beneficiaries said.

SSA employees interviewed for this article, speaking as union leaders, said they can relate.

Beneficiaries “struggle getting through to an agency that has all but become non-responsive to the public at this point due to understaffing,” said Jessica LaPointe, a claims specialist in SSA’s Madison, Wisconsin, field office and president of a union council representing Social Security employees.

Tiggemann, the agency spokesperson, cited the challenge of “staffing losses and resource constraints” in her written statement.

In a March 2023 budget message, SSA’s acting commissioner, Kilolo Kijakazi, said SSA was “rebuilding” its workforce after ending the 2022 fiscal year “at our lowest staffing level in over 25 years.”

New workers need a long time to get up to speed, employees said. Complex rules cause trouble for employees and beneficiaries alike.

Members of the public “often struggle to really understand what they’re supposed to report,” LaPointe said.

Rules for the Beneficiaries

Disability benefits are meant for people who can’t do a lot of work.

For disabled people who aren’t blind, the government generally draws a line at earning $1,470 or more per month.

It’s not just bank balances or paycheck amounts and the like that can affect a person’s benefits. In the SSI program, if a family member gives them meals or a place to stay, that can count as “in-kind support.”

Part of the trouble with SSI, critics say, is that limits on the assets that beneficiaries are allowed to hold without forfeiting benefits haven’t been adjusted since 1989. The asset limits stand at $2,000 for individuals and $3,000 for couples.

Had the asset limits been indexed for inflation since 1972, when the program was created, they would be almost five times as much as they are today, according to a July 2023 report by researchers at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Maintaining eligibility for SSI benefits leaves people with little money to fall back on — let alone to repay a large debt to the government.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced a bill on Sept. 12 to raise the limits.

The SSDI and SSI programs include rules meant to encourage people to work. However, “if beneficiaries attempt work, they are likely to be confronted with an overpayment, and it is likely to be large,” Smalligan and Chantel Boyens of the Urban Institute said in a March 2023 report commissioned by the Social Security Advisory Board.

‘In a Very Bad Place’

Justina Worrell’s aunt and caregiver Addie Arnold, 69, who took her in when she was orphaned as a child, said neither of them has $60,175.90 to repay the government.

The August 2022 letter demanding repayment of that amount was not the first or the last word they have received from the Social Security Administration about possible payment errors. The matter involves two streams of benefits — one from the account of Worrell’s deceased father, and another related to her disability, Arnold said.

“I’ve been confused ever since this started,” she said.

A February 2023 letter from the SSA claiming to explain how “we paid her [Worrell] $7,723.40 too much in benefits” includes difficult-to-decipher data going back to 1996.

The SSA has dropped its claim on some of the more than $60,000 it sought a year ago, but most remains outstanding, Arnold said.

Arnold believes part of the problem is that Worrell’s employer asked her to work additional hours at the nursing home, where she runs a dishwasher and carries trays.

“She is so afraid of losing her job that she will do whatever they ask her to do. That is part of her mental state,” Arnold wrote in a letter appealing to the Social Security Administration.

“I truly do hope and pray that she is allowed to stay on SSI,” Arnold wrote, “because she has to continue to live and without it she will be in a very bad place.”

Reporters contributing to this investigation: Josh Wade, Cox Media Group; Justin Gray, WSB-TV, Atlanta; John Bedell, WHIO-TV, Dayton, Ohio; Shannon Butler, WFTV-TV, Orlando, Florida; Amy Hudak, WPXI-TV, Pittsburgh; Jesse Jones, KIRO-TV, Seattle; Ted Daniel, WFXT-TV, Boston; Madison Carter, WSOC-TV, Charlotte, North Carolina; Ben Becker, WJAX-TV, Jacksonville, Florida

Meet the People Deciding How to Spend $50 Billion in Opioid Settlement Cash

0

As more than $50 billion makes its way to state and local governments to compensate for the opioid epidemic, people with high hopes for the money are already fighting over a little-known bureaucratic arm of the process: state councils that wield immense power over how the cash is spent.

In 14 states, these councils have the ultimate say on the money, which comes from companies that made, distributed, or sold opioid painkillers, including Purdue Pharma, Johnson & Johnson, and Walmart. In 24 other states, plus Washington, D.C., the councils establish budget priorities and make recommendations. Those will affect whether opioid settlement funds go, for example, to improve addiction treatment programs and recovery houses or for more narcotics detectives and prisons.

KFF Health News, along with Johns Hopkins University and Shatterproof, a national nonprofit focused on the addiction crisis, gathered and analyzed data on council members in all states to create the first database of its kind.

The data shows that councils are as unique as states are from one another. They vary in size, power, and the amount of funds they oversee. Members run the gamut from doctors, researchers, and county health directors to law enforcement officers, town managers, and business owners, as well as people in recovery and parents who’ve lost children to addiction.

“The overdose crisis is incredibly complex, and it demands more than just money,” said Rollie Martinson, a policy associate with the nonprofit Community Education Group, which is tracking settlement spending across Appalachia. “We also need the right people in charge of that money.”

That’s the $50 billion question: Are the right people steering the decisions? Already, criticism of the councils has been rife, with stakeholders pointing out shortcomings, from overrepresentation to underrepresentation and many issues in between. For example:

  • Council membership doesn’t always align with the states’ hardest-hit populations — by race or geography.
  • Heavy presence of specific professional groups — treatment providers, health care executives, or law enforcement officials, for example — might mean money gets directed to those particular interests at the expense of others.
  • Few seats are reserved for people who’ve dealt with a substance use disorder themselves or supported a family member with one.

Admittedly, no one can design a perfect council. There’s no agreement on what that would even look like. But when a pile of money this big is at stake, everyone wants in on the action.

More than $3 billion of opioid settlement funds has already landed in government coffers, with installments to come through 2038. The money is meant as restitution for the hundreds of thousands of Americans who have died from drug overdoses in recent decades.

But what restitution looks like depends on whom you ask. People running syringe service programs might suggest spending money immediately on the overdose reversal medication naloxone, while hospital officials might advocate for longer-term investments to increase staffing and treatment beds.

“People naturally want money to go toward their own field or interest,” said Kristen Pendergrass, vice president of state policy at Shatterproof.

And that can trigger hand-wringing.

In many parts of the country, for instance, people who support syringe service programs or similar interventions worry that councils with high numbers of police officers and sheriffs will instead direct large portions of the money to buy squad cars and bulletproof vests. And vice versa.

In most states, though, law enforcement and criminal justice officials make up fewer than one-fifth of council members. In Alaska and Pennsylvania, for instance, they’re not represented at all.

Outliers exist, of course. Tennessee’s 15-member council has two sheriffs, one current and one former district attorney general, a criminal court judge, and a special agent from the state Bureau of Investigation. But like many other councils, it hasn’t awarded funds to specific groups yet, so it’s too soon to tell how the council makeup will influence those decisions.

Pendergrass and Johns Hopkins researcher Sara Whaley, who together compiled the list of council members, say criticism of councils drawing too heavily from one field, geographic area, or race is not just a matter of political correctness, but of practicality.

“Having diverse representation in the room is going to make sure there is a balance on how the funds are spent,” Pendergrass said.

To this end, Courtney Gary-Allen, organizing director for the Maine Recovery Advocacy Project, and her colleagues chose early on to ensure their state’s 15-member council included people who support what’s known as harm reduction, a politically controversial strategy that aims to minimize the risks of using drugs. Ultimately, this push led to the appointment of six candidates, including Gary-Allen, to the panel. Most have personal experience with addiction.

“I feel very strongly that if these six folks weren’t on the council, harm reduction wouldn’t get a single dollar,” she said.

Others are starting to focus on potential lost opportunities.

In New Jersey, Elizabeth Burke Beaty, who is in recovery from substance use disorder, has noticed that most members of her state’s council represent urban enclaves near New York City and Philadelphia. She worries they’ll direct money to their home bases and exclude rural counties, which have the highest rates of overdose deaths and unique barriers to recovery, such as a lack of doctors to treat addiction and transportation to faraway clinics.

Natalie Hamilton, a spokesperson for New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy, a Democrat who appointed the members, said the council represents “a wide geographic region,” including seven of the state’s 21 counties.

But only two of those represented — Burlington and Hunterdon counties — are considered rural by the state’s Office of Rural Health needs assessment. The state’s hardest-hit rural counties lack a seat at the table.

Now that most of the council seats nationwide are filled, worries about racial equity are growing.

Louisiana, where nearly a third of the population is Black, has no Black council members. In Ohio, where Black residents are dying of overdoses at the highest rates, only one of the 29 council members is Black.

“There’s this perception that this money is not for people who look like me,” said Philip Rutherford, who is chief operating officer of Faces & Voices of Recovery and is Black. His group organizes people in recovery to advocate on addiction issues.

Research shows Black Americans have the fastest-rising overdose death rates and face the most barriers to gold-standard treatments.

In several states, residents have lamented the lack of council members with firsthand knowledge of addiction, who can direct settlement dollars based on personal experiences with the treatment and criminal justice systems. Instead, councils are saturated with treatment providers and health care organizations.

And this, too, raises eyebrows.

“Service providers are going to have a monetary interest,” said Tracie M. Gardner, who leads policy advocacy at the New York-based Legal Action Center. Although most are good people running good treatment programs, they have an inherent conflict with the goal of making people well and stable, she said.

“That is work to put treatment programs out of business,” Gardner said. “We must never forget the business model. It was there for HIV, it was there for covid, and it’s there for the overdose epidemic.”

Councils in South Carolina and New York have already seen some controversy in this vein — when organizations associated with members pursued or were awarded funding. It’s not a particularly surprising occurrence, since the members are chosen for their prominent work in the field.

Both states’ councils have robust conflict-of-interest policies, requiring members to disclose professional and financial connections. New York also has a law precluding council members from using their position for financial gain, and South Carolina uses a rubric to objectively score applications.

That these situations cause alarm regardless shows how much hope and desperation is tied up in this money — and the decisions over who controls it.

“This is the biggest infusion of funding into the addiction treatment field in at least 50 years,” said Gardner. “It’s money coming into a starved system.”

Database Methodology

The list of council members’ names used to build the database was compiled by Johns Hopkins University’s Sara Whaley and Henry Larweh and Shatterproof’s Kristen Pendergrass and Eesha Kulkarni. All council members, even those without voting power, were listed.

Although many states have councils to address the opioid crisis generally, the database focused specifically on councils overseeing the opioid settlement funds. A council’s scope of power was classified as “decision-making” if it directly controls allocations. “Advisory” means the council provides recommendations to another body, which makes final funding decisions.

The data is current as of June 9, 2023.

KFF Health News’ Aneri Pattani, Colleen DeGuzman, and Megan Kalata analyzed the data to determine which categories council members represent, based on the following rules:

— Each council member can be counted in only one category. There is no duplication.

— People should be given the most descriptive categorization possible. For example, attorneys general are “elected officials,” but it is more specific to say they are “law enforcement and criminal justice” officials.

— A “government representative” is typically a government employee who is not elected and does not fit into any other descriptive category — for example, a non-elected county manager.

— People who provide direct services to patients or clients, such as physicians, nurses, therapists, and social workers, are classified as “medical and social service providers.” People with more administrative roles are typically classified as “public” or “private health and human services,” based on their organization’s public or private affiliation.

— “Lived or shared experience” refers to someone who has personally experienced a substance use disorder, has a family member with one, or has lost a loved one to the disease. Because people’s addiction experiences are not always public, only individuals explicitly appointed because of their firsthand connection or to fill a seat reserved for someone with that experience were categorized as such.

KFF Health News’ Colleen DeGuzman and Megan Kalata contributed to this report.

KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core

100 Year Old History – The Buena Vista Restaurant

0

Sitting on the corner of Beach and Hyde, near Ghirardelli Square, The Buena Vista is a grand old Irish Restaurant and Bar.

It’s known for their World Famous Irish Coffee, a hot treat for a chilly San Francisco evening. The bay is visible across the street and you’ll see passerby’s while enjoying a breakfast or tasty dinner.  For dessert the bread pudding.




join the Buena Vista for Irish Coffee and laughs

California Moves Toward Banning Candy Additives

0

By Annie Sciacca

Halloween candy could be in for a California makeover.

Asserting that the Food and Drug Administration has not moved quickly enough on dangerous food additives, state lawmakers last month passed the California Food Safety Act, which bans four ingredients found in popular snacks and packaged foods — including candy corn and other Halloween treats.

Consumer health advocates hope the ban, signed into law by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on Oct. 7 and set to take effect in 2027, will lead confectioners and food producers to modify their recipes for products sold both in California and elsewhere around the country.

The law prohibits the manufacture and distribution of brominated vegetable oil, potassium bromate, propylparaben, and red dye No. 3, which are used in processed foods including variations of instant potatoes and store-brand sodas, as well as candies. The additives have been linked to increased risks of cancer and nervous system problems, according to the Environmental Working Group, which sponsored the legislation, and are already banned in many other countries.

Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs for the Environmental Working Group, celebrated the new law as “a very big deal” and the first of its type in the country.

Food manufacturers and their lobbyists opposed the legislation, rejecting the idea that the four additives are unhealthy and arguing that such assessments should be made by the FDA.

“We should rely on the scientific rigor of the FDA in terms of evaluating the safety of food ingredients and additives,” said Christopher Gindlesperger, a spokesperson for the National Confectioners Association.

But food safety advocates say the FDA has moved far too slowly in regulating food chemicals.

“It’s unacceptable that the U.S. is so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to food safety,” said state Assembly member Jesse Gabriel (D-Woodland Hills), who introduced the bill along with Assembly member Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), in a statement.

EMAIL SIGN-UP

Subscribe to KFF Health News’ free Morning Briefing.

A letter sent to lawmakers from the sponsors of AB 418 this year noted that many new additives put in food products are not reviewed by the FDA before reaching the market. A provision in federal law called “generally recognized as safe” allows the industry to designate the chemicals as safe enough to include in food, even without notifying the agency.

FDA spokesperson Enrico Dinges, referencing the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, noted in an email that “food and color additives must be approved for their intended conditions of use, and safety information must be available to establish a reasonable certainty of no harm before they are used in products on the market.”

He added that the agency regularly reviews new data on food chemicals, and it is working on a proposed rule to ban the use of brominated vegetable oil — one of the ingredients included in the new California law — as a food ingredient. Dinges said it was “not uncommon for a substance to be approved in one jurisdiction but not in another.” He noted some color additives are authorized for use in Europe and elsewhere but not allowed in the U.S.

California’s initiative made headlines this year as a “Skittles ban” that would wipe popular candies off California shelves. But Gabriel and other proponents of the bill said the intention is simply to require modifications in the ingredients, as has already happened in Europe.

One additive included in an original version of the bill — titanium dioxide, which is in Skittles and other candy — was removed from those products before the bill reached its final version. It has been labeled a carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.

“I admire the California legislature for doing this,” said Joan Ifland, a researcher who studies food addiction and a fellow at the American College of Nutrition. She hopes state lawmakers go further in addressing food safety issues and the chemicals in processed food. “It should give courage to other legislators.”

Perhaps the most prominent ingredient on California’s banned list is red dye No. 3. It is allowed only in candied and cocktail cherries in the European Union but is widely used in the U.S.

A search of Food Scores, an online database maintained by the Environmental Working Group, generated more than 3,000 products that contain the chemical. The list includes items like frosted pretzels and scores of brand-name candies such as Peeps and Pez. It also includes items like fruit cocktail cups, protein drinks, and yogurts.

Peeps is already phasing out the ingredient — products will no longer contain red dye No. 3 after the 2024 Easter season, according to Keith Domalewski, director of marketing for its parent company, Just Born Quality Confections.

“Just Born has always evolved with new developments and consumer preferences,” Domalewski said in an emailed statement. “We have worked hard to develop new formulations to bring fans the colorful PEEPS they know and love.”

Pez representatives did not respond to a request for comment. The two major manufacturers of candy corn also did not comment.

The FDA banned some uses of the color additive in 1990, confirming it had been linked to increased risks of cancer, and prohibited its use in cosmetics and as a pigment in various foods. It said at the time it was taking steps to restrict the chemical — but never did.

Another of the newly banned ingredients, potassium bromate, has also been linked to cancer and is on California’s Proposition 65 list of ingredients that may pose increased cancer risks. It also has not been banned.

Food manufacturers and distribution groups did not indicate whether they would challenge California’s new law.

This article was produced by KFF Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

RELATED TOPICS

CONTACT US

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.