Talk:Sudan I

message: If someone has the time and could search for it, I know I read an article about exactly how much of that sauce you would have to consume before the amount matches what was given to the laboratory animals that got cancer. I think it was in the vincinity of 800 liters.
I looked at a couple of the pubmed article abstracts (PMID: 15766589, PMID: 7548728 (#s 1&13)), and both call Sudan I a carcinogen, not a possible carcinogen.  Should the article be changed to reflect that scientists consider it a known carcinogen? Also, they explain that it acts by binding with DNA. I've no idea how concentrated it needs to be; it's the colorant that's toxic, so how concentrated it is in a given sauce could vary greatly - it was a minor ingredient in a minor ingredient in a minor ingredient in a minor ingredient in one sauce, <sic> yet far more concentrated in others. Also, "concentrated it needs to be" for what?  A 50% death rate? ( LD50) - Elvey 15:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: If there is proof for a substance to be actually carcinongenic, how come it is in IARC category 3? Their "3" is for everything where there is no conclusive proof, starting with clean drinking water and apples. Actual carcinogenic substances go to categories 2 (proven risk), or 1 (clear and present danger).
The article is confusing in this regard. Is there proof? And if there is none, and IARC category 3 applies, which other report caused the bans? --Jwilkes (talk) 21:32, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Carcinogenity

message: Hi.  The "food scare" section claims that the fact that it was not banned until very recently was not mentioned.  It definitely was, at least in some TV news bulletins.  It did not affect the slant of the reporting though.Pete9804 14:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media coverage 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  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) 01:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: So what was its E number?
Stuffed cat (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  E Number 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sudan I. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050220023632/http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthissues/factsbehindissues/sudandyes/ to http://www.eatwell.gov.uk/healthissues/factsbehindissues/sudandyes/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:38, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018)