Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The FDA review confined itself, in essence, to the clinical diagnosis of hyperactivity, as did the charge to the committee, rather than asking the broader environmental question of behavioral effects in the general population; it failed to recognize the significance of vulnerable subpopulations; and it misinterpreted the meaning of effect size as a criterion of risk. The FDA's response would have benefited from adopting the viewpoints and perspectives common to environmental health research. At the same time, the food color debate offers a lesson to environmental health researchers; namely, too narrow a focus on a single outcome or criterion can be misleading.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bernard Weiss (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: