Beloved American candy deemed 'unsafe to eat' in United Kingdom due to hidden chemicals
One of America's favorite candies has been shunned by authorities in the United Kingdom, who claim it is "unsafe to eat."
The U.K.'s Food Standards Agency (FSA) announced a stern advisory against Jolly Rancher candies on June 11.
The alert applies to all Jolly Rancher hard candies, as well as Jolly Rancher Misfits, Jolly Rancher Fruity 2 in 1s and Jolly Rancher Berry Gummies.
The reason, the FSA claims, is that the candies contain "Mineral Oil Aromatic Hydrocarbons (MOAH) and Mineral Oil Saturated Hydrocarbons (MOSH)."
The agency said the hydrocarbons make the candies "unsafe to eat and not compliant with U.K. laws."
The FSA has instructed British consumers not to buy or eat the products.
"If you've eaten these products, there should be no immediate cause for concern, as food safety risk is low, but don't eat any more," the agency said.
"These products contain mineral oil, which isn't allowed in food in the U.K. and may pose a food safety risk if consumed regularly over a sustained period of time."
Although the alert did not mention the word "ban," the FSA said that it had "requested enforcing authorities in the U.K. to take action to remove products, to protect consumers."
Jolly Ranchers were first introduced to the U.S. candy market in 1949. They come in a variety of flavors, including watermelon, cherry, blue raspberry, grape and green apple.
The candies were acquired by the Hershey Company in 1996.
Jolly Ranchers were first introduced to the U.S. candy market in 1949.
Todd Scott, a spokesperson for the Hershey Company, headquartered in Pennsylvania, told Fox News Digital this week that the "safety and quality" of Jolly Rancher candies is the company's "first priority, and consumers can rest assured that our products are safe to enjoy."
Scott went on, "As a global brand with a wide audience, we also recognize our products can sometimes be purchased in markets other than those for which they were originally produced. In such cases, we cannot guarantee that the products meet the regulatory requirements of the end market, which may differ from those of the U.S."
Mineral oil hydrocarbons enter food "through environmental contamination, use of lubricants for machinery, release agents, processing aids, food or feed additives and migration from food contact materials," according to the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
The negative health impacts of mineral oil hydrocarbons can vary widely, according to the European agency.
"MOAH may act as genotoxic carcinogens (they can damage DNA, the genetic material of cells, and may cause cancer), while some MOSH are known to accumulate in the liver and lymphoid system," the EFSA's website states.
The FDA also regulates the presence of hydrocarbons. According to the Code of Federal Regulations, mineral oil "may be safely used as a component of nonfood articles intended for use in contact with food," if it meets certain rules.
Scott told Fox News Digital that the Hershey Company is "continuing to work closely with the FSA in the United Kingdom on these important issues" and that it looks forward to "bringing Jolly Rancher products back to established retailers soon."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Voices: Putting cancer warnings on alcohol would help me drink less
Back in the early noughties, the indoor smoking ban led to an outcry over 'the nanny state'. The same happened when cigarette advertising was banned, and when manufacturers were required to plaster packs with images of diseased lungs. Yet over the past 40 years, according to Cancer Research, lung cancer rates in men have dropped by around 60 per cent. We may think we crave the rugged freedoms of the Marlboro Man, but given the facts, it turns out we don't actually want to die. And yet when it comes to alcohol, one of the world's biggest killers, a key driver of cancers, heart disease, strokes and obesity, there are no images of rotting livers on the chilled Sauvignon. The presentation of booze in the supermarket aisles is as benign as kitchen roll and chicken pie. It's described on restaurant menus with biblical reverence, it's advertised on TV in a hazy, golden-hour glow, and every other greetings card carries a hilarious reference to the booze-addled nature of the recipient. It is both normalised and celebrated, despite being the fifth greatest risk factor for death in the UK. Now, a group of major medical and health organisations have signed a letter to the Prime Minister calling for alcohol to carry explicit warnings that its consumption can cause cancer. The World Cancer Research Fund, which spearheaded the letter, cited 'shockingly low' public awareness that alcohol raises the risk of seven types of cancer – these being breast, bowel, stomach, head, neck, liver and mouth – and insisted that 'bold and unambiguous labelling' is urgently need to help save lives. Token efforts have long been made by the industry to toe a wavering line of responsibility – the number of units a bottle of wine contains written in a font the size of a gnat's IKEA instructions, or a glancing mention that pregnant women shouldn't drink. According to the Advertising Standards Authority, 'Lively, but responsible, social interaction or party scenes with alcohol present are allowed but…no behaviour may be adolescent or childish.' If only that diktat held true in real-life 'party scenes.' Initially, like much of Gen X and our wine-necking Boomer parents, I was resistant to the idea of cancer warnings. If I wanted to slowly kill myself in a responsible and socially acceptable manner, I felt it should be my choice to do so. But after another night of drinking slightly too much with friends, waking bathed in shame and a light prosecco sweat, I reconsidered. Women, particularly, are at risk of harm from alcohol, simply because we're smaller. If every time I picked up the wine bottle to top up my glass – over a healthy dinner! So civilised! – it reminded me that I was increasing my risk of cancer, I suspect I might put it back down. Humans like to ignore the dangers when it's something we want to do until it becomes impossible to turn a blind eye. But this time, it's not so much the consumers resisting warnings as the enormously powerful drinks industry. It's already up against Gen Z's wellbeing crusade, with a tsunami of kumbucha and kefir washing away the old-school shots and spirits from nights out. The risk of drinkers murmuring, 'Actually, I don't think I do want seven types of cancer' and switching the kettle on instead is a step too far. A spokesperson for the Portman Group, which oversees UK alcohol labelling in the UK, says: 'Whilst we do not dispute the link between alcohol and certain cancers… blanket cancer warning labels…can create unnecessary anxiety, eroding trust in health advice and alienating the very people who require support.' As an argument, this is weaker than a sixth-form debating point scribbled on the bus. Imagine the motor industry saying, 'Road signs create unnecessary anxiety. Let's not warn people that they might crash, lest we alienate drivers.' The spokesperson added that most alcohol products already include advice to limit drinking to 14 units a week, and claimed that 'most people drink within guidelines.' According to NHS Digital, however, 24 per cent of Brits drink more than this, while the charity Drinkaware has found that 32 per cent of men and 15 per cent of women regularly sink more than the recommended limit – and it is a limit, not a target. Doctors repeatedly warn that there is no safe level of alcohol consumption, and in April, the World Health Organisation advised that women should drink no alcohol at all to avoid a heightened risk of breast cancer. I'm aware that even reading this is annoying. I share the general British resentment over finger-wagging admonishments from the Fun Police. I want to say, 'You'll prise my Picpoul from my cold, dead hand.' The only thing is, I'd rather not be cold and dead – and I'm increasingly convinced that warning labels can only be a good thing. Although, of course, we must be careful how we approach this new regime. After all, we wouldn't want to alienate anybody.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Plans unveiled for NHS funding to be linked to patient feedback
NHS funding could be linked to patient feedback under new plans, with poorly performing services that "don't listen" penalised with less money. As part of the "10 Year Health Plan" to be unveiled next week, a new scheme will be trialled that will see patients asked to rate the service they received - and if they feel it should get a funding boost or not. It will be introduced first for services that have a track record of very poor performance and where there is evidence of patients "not being listened to", the government said. This will create a "powerful incentive for services to listen to feedback and improve patients' experience", it added. Sky News understands that it will not mean bonuses or pay increases for the best performing staff. NHS payment mechanisms will also be reformed to reward services that keep patients out of hospital as part of a new 'Year of Care Payments' initiative and the government's wider plan for change. Speaking to The Times, chief executive of the NHS Confederation Matthew Taylor expressed concerns about the trial. He told the newspaper: "Patient experience is determined by far more than their individual interaction with the clinician and so, unless this is very carefully designed and evaluated, there is a risk that providers could be penalised for more systemic issues, such as constraints around staffing or estates, that are beyond their immediate control to fix." He said that NHS leaders would be keen to "understand more about the proposal", because elements were "concerning". Read more from Sky News Health Secretary Wes Streeting said: "We will reward great patient care, so patient experience and clinical excellence are met with extra cash. These reforms are key to keeping people healthy and out of hospital, and to making the NHS sustainable for the long-term as part of the Plan for Change." In the raft of announcements in the 10 Year Health Plan, the government has said 201 bodies responsible for overseeing and running parts of the NHS in England will be scrapped. These include Healthwatch England, set up in 2012 to speak out on behalf of NHS and social care patients, the National Guardian's Office, created in 2015 to support NHS whistleblowers, and the Health Services Safety Investigations Body (HSSIB). Elsewhere, the new head of NHS England Sir Jim Mackey said key parts of the NHS appear "built to keep the public away because it's an inconvenience". "We've made it really hard, and we've probably all been on the end of it," he told the Daily Telegraph. "The ward clerk only works nine to five, or they're busy doing other stuff; the GP practice scrambles every morning."
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Spain's Aitana Bonmati diagnosed with viral meningitis ahead of Euro 2025
Spain midfielder Aitana Bonmati has been diagnosed with viral meningitis ahead of this summer's European Championship, her head coach Montse Tome has confirmed. On Friday night, the 27-year-old Barcelona midfielder posted a photo of herself watching Spain's 3-1 defeat of Japan in a pre-tournament friendly from a hospital bed with a cannula in her arm. Advertisement Bonmati, who has won each of the two most recent women's Ballon d'Or awards for the best footballer in the world, is a key player for Spain, who play Portugal in their tournament opener on July 3. 'Aitana was feverish the previous night, the next day she did not get better,' Tome said on Friday. 'She was tired, we let her rest and then this morning the doctor took her to run some tests, at first the tests came back normal but the last test — and by the way she has authorised me to talk about this — shows that she has viral meningitis. 'She is under medical supervision, I know that this is an alarming situation but the doctor is telling me that she is being taken care of, she is in the hospital, we do not know for how long, but she wanted me to communicate the situation with you all. This is all I can share at this time.' Advertisement Viral meningitis is the most common and least serious type of the disease, as opposed to bacterial meningitis. It is an inflammation of the protective membranes surrounding the brain and spinal cord. According to the British National Health Service (NHS), viral meningitis typically takes seven to 10 days to fully recover from. Spain, the reining world champions, are among the favourites for Euro 2025 with Bonmati part of a midfield trio alongside club team-mates Patri Guijarro and Alexia Putellas. This article originally appeared in The Athletic. Barcelona, Spain, Women's Soccer, Women's Euros, Women's World Cup 2025 The Athletic Media Company
