Are E-Numbers Bad for You? What the Science Actually Shows

What E-numbers actually are

An E-number is simply a standardised code for a food additive that has been assessed and approved for use in the European Union. The UK retained this system after Brexit. The "E" stands for "Europe" — it means the substance has passed a formal safety evaluation.

E-numbers cover a wide range of substances: preservatives, colourings, emulsifiers, sweeteners, antioxidants, thickeners, and flavour enhancers. Some are synthetic. Many are naturally occurring. The number itself tells you nothing about whether the additive is "natural" or "artificial" — it simply identifies it.

There are currently over 300 approved E-numbers used in UK food. You can browse the full list in the NutraSafe E-Numbers Database.

How EFSA tests and approves food additives

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is responsible for assessing the safety of food additives before they can be given an E-number. The process is thorough and multi-stage:

1. Application and dossier — The manufacturer submits a detailed dossier including toxicological studies, proposed uses, and estimated consumer exposure levels.
2. Toxicological evaluation — EFSA's Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings (FAF) reviews the data. This includes studies on genotoxicity (DNA damage), carcinogenicity (cancer risk), reproductive toxicity, and chronic toxicity.
3. Establishing the ADI — If the additive passes, EFSA sets an Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI). This is the amount a person can consume every day over a lifetime without appreciable health risk. The ADI typically includes a 100-fold safety factor below the level at which no adverse effects were observed in animal studies.
4. Ongoing re-evaluation — EFSA has been systematically re-evaluating all food additives approved before 2009, using current scientific standards. This programme is ongoing and has led to some ADIs being revised.

The ADI concept is important. When someone says "this additive is safe", what they mean is: at the levels typically consumed in food, the evidence does not show harm. This doesn't mean consuming unlimited quantities is fine — it means that within normal dietary patterns, the risk is considered negligible.

E-numbers that are just vitamins

One of the clearest ways to understand that "E-number" does not mean "dangerous chemical" is to look at the E-numbers that are literally vitamins and nutrients your body needs:

These are used in food manufacturing for their functional properties (preventing oxidation, adding colour, gelling), but they're chemically identical to the vitamins you'd find in a multivitamin tablet or in whole foods. Nobody would describe vitamin C as a "dangerous chemical", yet listed as E300 on an ingredients label, it can trigger alarm in people who associate all E-numbers with harm.

Common E-numbers and what they actually are

Here's a reference table of frequently encountered E-numbers, their real names, and what they do. For the full database, see the NutraSafe E-Numbers guide.

Many of these — citric acid, lecithins, pectin, curcumin — are naturally occurring substances. Others, like aspartame, are synthetic but have been extensively studied. The NutraSafe barcode scanner identifies every additive in a product and explains what each one does.

The Southampton Study: what it actually found

The most significant piece of research driving public concern about E-numbers is the 2007 Southampton Study (McCann et al.), commissioned and funded by the UK Food Standards Agency (FSA).

What the study did

Researchers conducted a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving approximately 300 children in two age groups (3-year-olds and 8-9-year-olds). Children were given drinks containing one of two mixtures of six artificial food colourings plus the preservative sodium benzoate (E211), or a placebo. The six colourings tested were:

• E102 — Tartrazine (yellow)
• E104 — Quinoline yellow
• E110 — Sunset yellow
• E122 — Carmoisine (red)
• E124 — Ponceau 4R (red)
• E129 — Allura red

What it found

The study found a statistically significant increase in hyperactive behaviour in children consuming the additive mixtures compared to placebo. The effect was observed in both age groups, though the results varied between the two mixtures. For more detail on these specific colourings, see our dedicated article on the Southampton Six food colourings.

What happened next

The FSA reviewed the findings and advised that manufacturers voluntarily remove these six colourings from their products. Many UK manufacturers complied — which is why many sweets and soft drinks that were once brightly coloured now use natural alternatives like beetroot extract or spirulina.

The European Union went further: products still containing any of the six colourings must now carry the label warning "may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children".

E-numbers some people choose to avoid

While no E-number on the approved list is considered unsafe at normal dietary levels, some have attracted more scrutiny than others. Here's what the current evidence shows — presented factually, not as a recommendation to avoid:

The Southampton Six colourings (E102, E104, E110, E122, E124, E129)

Evidence level: One well-designed study (McCann et al., 2007) found a link to increased hyperactivity in children. The effect was for the mixture, not individual colourings in isolation. Many UK manufacturers have already removed them voluntarily. EU products must carry a warning label.

Sodium benzoate (E211)

Evidence level: Was included in the Southampton Study mixture. Independently, when combined with ascorbic acid (vitamin C) in acidic drinks, it can form benzene at low levels. EFSA considers it safe at current ADI levels. Some individuals report sensitivity.

Sulphites (E220-E228)

Evidence level: Well-established that sulphites can trigger asthmatic reactions in sensitive individuals. UK food labelling law requires sulphites above 10mg/kg to be declared as an allergen. They are not considered harmful for the general population at normal exposure levels.

Aspartame (E951)

Evidence level: One of the most extensively studied food additives in history. In 2023, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified aspartame as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" (Group 2B), while simultaneously, a joint FAO/WHO committee reaffirmed the existing ADI of 40mg/kg body weight as safe. To exceed this, a 70kg adult would need to drink approximately 12-36 cans of diet drink daily, depending on the product.

Monosodium glutamate — MSG (E621)

Evidence level: Despite decades of popular concern ("Chinese restaurant syndrome"), systematic reviews have not confirmed that MSG causes adverse effects at typical dietary levels. EFSA set an ADI of 30mg/kg body weight in 2017. Glutamate occurs naturally in foods like tomatoes, parmesan cheese, and soy sauce. Some individuals report sensitivity, but blinded studies have generally not replicated these effects at normal intake levels.

Titanium dioxide (E171)

Evidence level: Banned as a food additive in the EU since 2022 following an EFSA opinion that genotoxicity concerns could not be ruled out. The UK has not yet followed the EU ban, though it is under review by the FSA. This is a case where the science prompted regulatory divergence between jurisdictions.

Why E-numbers have such a bad reputation

If most E-numbers are safe and some are literally vitamins, why does the public perception remain so negative? Several factors contribute:

• The "chemical" framing — Marketing has successfully positioned "no E-numbers" as a selling point, implying that E-numbers are undesirable chemicals. In reality, every food is made of chemicals. Water is a chemical. Vitamin C is a chemical.
• Guilt by association — The Southampton Study raised legitimate concerns about six specific colourings. The media coverage often broadened this to "E-numbers cause hyperactivity" — a much wider claim than the study supported.
• "Clean label" marketing — Some manufacturers replace E-number additives with functionally identical substances that have friendlier-sounding names. "Beetroot extract" sounds more appealing than "E162", even though they're the same thing.
• Unfamiliarity with the numbering system — "E621" sounds industrial. "Glutamate" sounds scientific. "The savoury flavour in tomatoes and parmesan" sounds delicious. They're all describing the same thing.

None of this means additives should never be questioned. The regulatory system exists precisely because some substances would be harmful at high doses, and the ADI system keeps intake well within safe limits. But the reflexive assumption that any E-number is harmful is not supported by the evidence. For a full primer on the system, read our guide: What Are E-Numbers?

How to make informed choices

Rather than avoiding all E-numbers on principle, a more evidence-based approach is:

1. Know which additives you personally want to monitor — If you have asthma, sulphites (E220-E228) are worth being aware of. If you're buying food for young children, you may want to check for the Southampton Six colourings.
2. Read labels with context — An ingredients list with E-numbers isn't automatically worse than one without. Look at what the additives actually are, not just that they exist.
3. Use tools that explain, not just list — Seeing "E330" on a label tells you nothing. Seeing "E330 — citric acid, found naturally in lemons, used as an acidity regulator" gives you what you need to make an informed decision.
4. Focus on overall dietary patterns — The evidence consistently shows that overall diet quality matters more than individual additives. A diet rich in whole foods, fruits, vegetables, and wholegrains will naturally contain fewer additives — not because additives are inherently harmful, but because whole foods are nutritionally richer. See our complete guide to E-number safety.

Frequently asked questions

Are E-numbers safe to eat?

The vast majority of E-numbers are considered safe at typical dietary levels. Every E-number must pass a rigorous safety assessment by EFSA before approval. Many are naturally occurring — E300 is vitamin C, E160a is beta-carotene. Some individuals may have sensitivities to specific additives, but the blanket claim that all E-numbers are harmful is not supported by scientific evidence.

What does the "E" in E-numbers stand for?

The "E" stands for "Europe". An E-number means the additive has been assessed and approved for use in the EU (and the UK, which retained the system after Brexit). It's a standardised code used across all food labelling — essentially a safety certification, not a warning.

Which E-numbers should I avoid?

There's no universal list everyone should avoid. The six Southampton colourings (E102, E104, E110, E122, E124, E129) have been linked to increased hyperactivity in some children, and many manufacturers have voluntarily removed them. People with asthma may be sensitive to sulphites (E220-E228). Beyond specific sensitivities, routine avoidance of all E-numbers isn't necessary based on current evidence.

Are natural additives safer than artificial ones?

Not necessarily. Both natural and artificial additives undergo the same EFSA safety assessment. Some natural substances can cause reactions (carmine/E120 can trigger allergies in some people), while many synthetic additives have excellent safety records. The origin of an additive doesn't reliably predict its safety — the evidence from toxicological testing is what matters.

What was the Southampton Study on food colourings?

The Southampton Study (McCann et al., 2007) was an FSA-funded trial testing two mixtures of six artificial colourings plus sodium benzoate on approximately 300 children. It found a statistically significant increase in hyperactive behaviour. The FSA subsequently advised manufacturers to voluntarily remove these colourings, and the EU now requires a warning label on products containing them. The study tested specific mixtures — it did not conclude that all additives cause hyperactivity.

Related articles

• What Are E-Numbers? A Complete UK Guide
• The Southampton Six: Food Colourings and Children's Behaviour
• NutraSafe E-Numbers Database
• Food Additive Scanner UK
• Are E-Numbers Bad for You? (Landing Page)

Last reviewed and updated: 7 February 2026