Everyday children's medicines found in cupboards up and down the country contain a "cocktail of additives" banned from foods and drinks for youngsters of the same age, a food watchdog has claimed.
Brands widely used by parents such as Calpol, Benylin, Sudafed, and Tixylix have all fallen foul of a survey of medicines for infants under three, amid concerns manufacturers are using synthetic ingredients unnecessarily.
The survey, by the Food Commission, found many products routinely contain colourings and multiple artificial sweeteners and preservatives, which could have harmful side effects.
Of 41 medicines scrutinised, just one product was found not to contain a food additive or additives which are prohibited from foodstuffs manufactured for infants under 36 months. That was Superdrug's own label children's dry cough syrup.
Potential side effects of the additives - such as E123, E214, E216, and E218 - include delayed allergic reactions, irritation of the skin, eyes and mucosal surfaces, stomach upsets, laxative effects, and diarrhoea.
Nigel Meadows, a paediatric gastroenterologist currently treating a young child with an allergy to a paracetamol product, told The Herald that the use of additives to make medicine more palatable to children had run its course, and called on the pharmaceutical industry to launch a review of childhood medicine.
Ian Tokelove, spokesman for the commission's Food Magazine, said: "It seems that the food manufacturers and drug manufacturers operate under different rules, which is crazy. Smarties manufacturer Nestle cleaned up its act, and if the food manufacturers can do it why can't the pharmaceutical industry? Whilst many children will be able to consume these products safely, there will be those who will suffer allergic reactions to additives.
"It is time for medicine manufacturers to clean up their act and remove any unnecessary additives. We believe that colourings and artificial sweeteners can be replaced with natural alternatives, and the use of preservatives should be rigorously questioned."
Just over half the medicines warned of possible side effects linked to the consumption of specific food additives.
Dr Meadows, a consultant at the Royal London Hospital, said: "Additives and colourings were introduced to make medicine easier for children to take, but more and more, we are seeing allergic reactions.
"I am treating one young child allergic to Calpol paracetamol, and I'm looking to break down the individual components to source the allergy. It is time the industry looked more closely at the use of additives in children's medicine, and whether these ingredients are necessary at all."
Food and drink manufacturers tend to adhere to 1992 guidance issued by the government that natural flavourings only should be used in foods for young infants, but the report claims that "some medicine manufacturers think it is OK for babies to be exposed to artificial flavourings".
The Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), the body responsible for the regulation of medical products in the UK, said that in accordance with European legislation, it permits the inclusion of additives, including colourants, in foods and drugs. The MHRA added that the "function and usefulness" of all such additives in medicines must be justified before a licence to market products is granted.
The survey found azo dyes were present in five items out of 41 surveyed.
Preservatives were discovered in all but 10 of the medicines surveyed. Sweeteners were found in 37 of the 41 medicines.
A spokesman for Calpol said last night: "Almost all medicines contain colouring and flavouring agents to enable consumers to identify them and to make them more acceptable to take, disguising the less palatable taste of the active ingredient."
He added: "This is particularly relevant with children's medicines, as ensuring children take their medicine is important to parents."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article