The idea that food aditives, dyes in particular, cause behavioural changes is not new at all, it's been around since the ~1970s.
more recent findings such as
this one
British researchers found removing food additives from the diet of a group of 3-year-olds caused a reduction in the children's hyperactive behavior
reported by their parents. And when the food colorings and preservatives were added back into the children's diets, the parents reported an increase
in hyperactivity.
Based on these parental reports of behavioral changes, researchers estimate that if the current 15% of children thought to have hyperactivity-related
behavior problems were to go on an additive-free diet, the prevalence could be reduced to 6%.
here's another
renew these claims, while the official stance is still the same, that there is no credible evidence.
Source f-ex. ific.org
..
Although this theory was popularized in the 1970s, well-controlled studies conducted since then have produced no evidence that food color additives
cause hyperactivity or learning disabilities in children. A Consensus Development Panel of the National Institutes of Health concluded in 1982 that
there was no scientific evidence to support the claim that colorings or other food additives cause hyperactivity. The panel said that elimination
diets should not be used universally to treat childhood hyperactivity, since there is no scientific evidence to predict which children may benefit.
..
so, which is it? would be nice if thngs were that simple, of course.
what strikes me is the diametric opposition of the two camps, i mean if a study was easily discredited, they'd simply do it. instead, adverse
findings are universally ignored and quickly slip beneath the waves.