E Numbers, Decoded.
Every approved UK/EU food additive, in plain language. Searchable by name, number, category, or verdict. Built from the UK Food Standards Agency, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), and the peer-reviewed literature. Free. Open. No paywall.
An E number is just a code. It does not, on its own, tell you whether a food is safe, healthful, or worth eating. The same additive can be inert at one dose, fine for most people at typical exposures, and worth flagging in specific contexts. This reference holds the two layers together — clear at lay-reading depth, accurate at clinical depth.
Methodology · Sources · Caveats
Sources. UK Food Standards Agency; European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) re-evaluations; International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) monographs; UK Food Information Regulations 2014 (retained EU law) including statutory hyperactivity warnings (Southampton Six); peer-reviewed primary literature where named.
Verdicts. Each entry carries one of four verdicts. Generally fine — well-tolerated for the great majority at typical UK exposures; no current regulatory or clinical concern. Worth knowing — specific population or context-dependent considerations (allergies, sulphite sensitivity, gout, sugar-substitute laxative effect, etc.); not avoidance advice. Worth flagging — carries a statutory warning, a binding regulatory action (EU 2022 titanium dioxide ban, Southampton Six hyperactivity warning), or a substantive evidence base of harm at typical exposures. Data pending — insufficient public evidence to verdict; under review.
What this is not. Not medical advice. Not a substitute for individualised clinical guidance. Not a complete toxicology profile (each entry is a one-line summary; the linked source documents carry the full evidence base). For specific clinical conditions consult a registered dietitian, GP, or NHS resource.
Updates. Verdicts reflect the regulatory and evidence position as of the dateModified above. Where a verdict is contested or evolving (sucralose metabolites, erythritol cardiovascular research, polysorbate gut-microbiome research), the entry names the dispute and points to the observational vs causal distinction.
Why this is free. Per SCANSMART's Belongs-to-Everyone Rule. Food literacy is class-blind, language-blind, app-blind, condition-blind. Reference content of this kind sits behind no paywall and never will.
Where this reference connects.
For deeper evidence-vault treatment connecting this reference to the SCANSMART analytical framework, see: Impulse Buying Triggers · Food Marketing to Kids (Southampton Six and children's hyperactivity) · Brand vs Manufacturer · Reformulation Tracking (additive changes track formulation drift) · Cultural Food Myths · Global Staple Foods · Dietary Patterns · Carbohydrate Types · Caffeine and Health · Industry Funding Bias in Nutrition Research · UPF Brain & Cognitive Claims · Children’s Oral Health · Behaviour Change & Decision-Point Capture.
Reference-format consistency pass · 11 May 2026 · Stale-date reminder: re-check after next EFSA additive reauthorisation cycle and FSA / OHID guidance updates (titanium dioxide E171 ban remains a recent reference point) · SCANSMART is a food literacy and decision-support platform. It is not a medical device and does not provide medical advice.