• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

With their garish neon neons bedroom signs, fluorescent lighting and shelves stacked with colourful packets, the shops are impossible to miss.

Inside, a sickly-sweet smell lingers as schoolchildren jostle to grab bags of gummy sweets, popping candy and day-glo yellow gum. With names like ‘American Candy World', these US-style stores are now commonplace in cities up and down the country.

Compared with traditional British sweetshops, they are super-sized shrines to sugar: bigger, brighter and - if you're a parent - almost impossible to avoid.

My eldest is only five, but he's already hooked on the concept of ‘candy', sold in packets bearing his favourite cartoon characters. And as much as I try to avoid buying it for him, others sometimes do - and while I know there's no nutritional value, surely one or two occasionally won't do him any harm...

Now I'm not so sure. Last week, the Chartered Trading Standards Institute issued an urgent warning about thousands of sweets, snacks and fizzy drinks sold at these shops.

Following the confiscation of 4,000 products in Staffordshire, the investigation found items on sale containing banned additives linked to behavioural problems, health issues and even cancer.




One of the garish neon American Candy Shops, stacked with colourful packets of sweets





Many sweets contain maltodextrin, a highly processed starchy powder, which can negatively impact blood sugar

Though illegal in the UK, many of these ingredients are permissible in the US - meaning there's a loophole when the sweets are imported to be sold over here, with potentially toxic consequences.

So what's really in the American-style candy our kids can't get enough of?

First things first, says nutritionist Sophie Bertrand, the primary ingredient is sugar - usually corn syrup, which softens the texture and enhances the flavour.

‘Corn syrup can cause a rapid increase in blood sugar levels and consuming too much of it is associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes, heart disease and cancer,' explains Bertrand, who is a nutritionist for metabolic health tracker Abbott's Lingo Business.

‘What can be concerning is that so many of these types of products are marketed towards children, who don't have the maturity to understand the impact of these heavily processed treats.'

What's more, she adds, many sweets contain maltodextrin, a highly processed starchy powder. ‘This can negatively impact blood sugar and is linked to changing the composition of gut bacteria,' says Bertrand. ‘As a nutritionist, I recommend ingredients like this should be limited.'

For the purposes of research, I purchased ten packets of popular American candy, with brands including Razzles and Warheads.

You can buy these products online, with UK-based businesses delivering the sugary substances direct to the door. A glance at the ingredients listed on the packets shows their limited nutritional value.

Most contain 0g of protein, fibre, vitamins and minerals - and, in the case of a 102g bag of Sour Patch Kids, 24g of added sugar (48 per cent of your recommended daily allowance) per serving.

But this is far from the worst of it. Take a closer look and many of these harmless-looking packets bear alarming health warnings.

Several - such as American Jelly Fruits, which require a small cap to be twisted off before the jelly inside is squeezed out - are explicit choking hazards and not suitable for children under five.

Meanwhile, on a packet of aptly named Toxic Waste, you'll find a warning: ‘Consuming more than one piece at a time may cause irritation to the mouth. Sensitive individuals should not consume this product.' Several other sweets - such as Sour Patch Kids and Warheads Sour Berry Cubes - bear the worrying disclaimer: ‘Contains bioengineered food ingredients.'

I'm well aware these sorts of products are packed with artificial colours, flavours and additives, but what does all this actually mean?

Aidan Goggins, a pharmacist and nutritional medicine director of the creative consultancy Kyros Project, says seven of the ten candies we asked him to analyse contain synthetic colours - which are so detrimental to health that they must carry a warning.

Disturbingly, this warning - ‘May have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children' - is not printed on the packet itself. The warning is only found in smallprint online or in-store at the point of sale, meaning it's extremely easy to miss.

Laffy Taffy, a chewy strawberry-flavoured sweet, for example, contains E129, a red colourant which research has linked with behavioural issues in children.

Sour Patch Kids contain E110 and E102, both yellow-hued additives, which have been associated with hyperactivity and allergic reactions.

‘Synthetic food colours are often seen as harmless when used within legal limits,' explains Goggins. ‘However, research is suggesting their effects can go far beyond the official warnings.

‘Tartrazine (E102) has been linked to stress on key organs like the liver and kidneys. If consumed daily - something that happens easily with children eating sweets, crisps or drinking colourful beverages - the risks could add up.'

Aidan singled out Krabby Patties, a burger-shaped gummy sweet with cartoon character Spongebob Squarepants on the packaging, as one of the worst he analysed.

It contains E171, or titanium dioxide, a chemical outlawed in the European Union due to concerns it may cause cancer - and yet it made its way into American sweets sold over here.

E171 was banned by the European Food Safety Authority in 2021, a decision underpinned by a review of 11,000 studies.



Read More


As 2,000 sue over talc cancer link, should you be worried? Experts' must-read guide


‘The findings were clear,' says Goggins. ‘Concerns about potential genotoxicity - damage to DNA - could not be ruled out, and this additive posed risks inconsistent with its continued use in the food chain.'

Razzles - a brightly coloured candy that turns into gum - is another concerning product, containing E321 (butylated hydroxytoluene or BHT), a synthetic antioxidant derived from coal tar.

‘BHT is not only used in food, but also in petroleum products, rubber and plastics,' says Goggins. ‘Emerging suggestions of potential adverse effects, such as hormone disruption and cancer risk linked to low-grade, long-term exposure, add to the unease.'

Several products found in American candy have been banned in other products: carrageenan, for example, a common additive used to thicken foodstuffs (and found in American Jelly Fruits), has been prohibited in powdered baby formula in the US.

‘Recent research has raised serious questions about its metabolic impact,' adds Goggins. ‘One notable study published this year in The Lancet highlighted a troubling link between carrageenan consumption and an increased risk of diabetes.'

Research on these additives is still ongoing, with health experts pushing for bans of potentially harmful chemicals that continue to be used as colour and flavour-enhancers in candy marketed at children.

There is growing pressure in the US this month to ban red dye No. 3, an artificial colouring that gives a cherry tinge to sweets.

‘There is simply no reason for this chemical to be in our food except to entice and mislead consumers to make their food look more appealing,' congressman Frank Pallone told a US Senate committee last week.

‘It is frightening that this chemical remains hidden in these foods that we and our children are consuming.'

Frightening indeed - but what can be done about it?

The art of colouring confectionery to make it more appetising goes back as far as ancient Egyptian sweet-makers in 1,500 BC - but it is only in the past 30 years that natural, plant-based colourants have been replaced by cheaper artificial ones.

Almost all of the synthetic dyes and additives in American-style candy could, says Aidan Goggins, be replaced by natural ones - ranging from beetroot and paprika extract to turmeric and spirulina. ‘When we consider that the only nutritional value these products offer is energy from sugar and that these additives may exacerbate behavioural issues, the situation becomes deeply troubling,' he adds.

‘When healthful, plant-based alternatives are available, it raises questions about the ethics of relying on synthetic dyes in confectionery targeted at children.'

For now, until more of the additives in sweets are banned from sale, the responsibility is on parents to simply say no.

So if your children ask for candy from Santa Claus this year, don't be tempted by the innocuous-looking, brightly coloured packets that flood High Street shops.

After all, cancer, behavioural problems and diabetes aren't on anyone's Christmas list.