Jump to content

Talk:Ponceau 4R

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sambot (talk | contribs) at 10:56, 27 May 2009 (BOT: WikiProject Food and drink auto-assessment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconFood and drink Stub‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Food and Drink task list:
To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:
Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Ponceau 4R as a carcinogen

This is a fairly controversial claim, and as such, "Ponceau 4R has been proven to cause cancer" isn't good enough. Proven by whom? And when? Cites are required.

I had a look around on PubMed, but it wasn't particularly helpful. Is the chemical teratogenic? Genotoxic? Carcinogenic? No. Yes. Maybe.

Various studies: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Potatojunkie 07:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at these two articles in the newspaper The Daily Telegraph. Would be nice to have them integrated in the article. [7] [8] MaxPont 21:02, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs cleanup

This article makes many claims without citation, and most of the citations that are provided are just newspaper articles. As usual, the newspaper articles are not clear proofs of anything. In some cases, even when there is a citation, the citation actually makes no mention of the claim that is supposedly being proven.

This article needs some serious cleanup. Unfortunately, that will be very difficult. There are many people who are very emotional about the issue of food colorings. They will likely wreck any good cleanup work that is done here, unless Wikipedia standards are somehow enforced here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ygale (talkcontribs) 10:39, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The follow up study by the EFSA can be found here. It does support the finding of the original UK study with the exception of two (significant places). Someone with a bit more knowledge on the subject should look into this article: link Assessment of the results of the study by McCann et al. (2007) on the effect of some colours and sodium benzoate on children’s behaviour (1) - Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Food Contact Materials (AFC)—Preceding comment added by Shirag 13:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.213.242 (talk) [reply]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 01:20, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]