E-numbers in ingredients: how the code is structured and what it means

An ingredient list contains E330, and it is impossible to tell from this code whether it is citric acid or something better to avoid. Meanwhile, the code itself is structured logically, and it can be read without checking a reference book for every line.

What the letter actually means

The E stands for a unified European list of food additives, where a substance is included only after a safety assessment. The same number without the letter exists in the international Codex Alimentarius system, where it is called INS. The assigned code means exactly one thing: the substance has been reviewed and approved for use in food under specific conditions.

The code says nothing about the origin. E300 is ascorbic acid, which is vitamin C. E440 is pectin, obtained from apple pomace and citrus peels. E330 is citric acid. E160a is beta-carotene, which the body converts into vitamin A. All four are found in ordinary food without any packaging.

It follows that the "E-free" label on the front of a package is a marketing choice, not a reflection of the ingredients. A manufacturer is entitled to write "citric acid" instead of E330 and "locust bean gum" instead of E410: labeling requirements allow both. The substance is the same; only the readability has changed. The purpose of the code is precisely its unambiguity—the word "gum" could hide a dozen different thickeners, while E410 refers to only one.

What the first digit tells you

Numbers are not assigned sequentially, but in groups based on function. The first digit answers the question of why the substance was added to the product.

The 700s and 800s are practically never seen in food lists: this range was once reserved for antibiotics and is not used in food. The gap in the table is not a missing entry, but an empty section of the numbering system.

The main limitation of the table should be stated clearly: the group describes the function of the substance, not its safety. In the first hundred, beta-carotene and synthetic colors requiring mandatory warning labels sit side by side. In the 600s, you find both monosodium glutamate, around which an entire genre of scare stories has been built, and ribonucleotides, which no one disputes. You cannot draw a conclusion about an additive based on its hundred-series group.

The letter after the numbers specifies the exact substance. E160a and E160b belong to the same group of carotenoids, but the first is beta-carotene, the second is annatto from the seeds of the achiote tree, and they share nothing but color. E471 is not a single compound, but a family of mono- and diglycerides. Sometimes a Roman numeral is added: E450i and E450ii are different diphosphates within the E450 group. On labels, these suffixes are often lost, making the code less precise than it could be.

Who decides what can be put in a product

In Russia and other EAEU countries, this is TR TS 029/2012—a technical regulation on the safety of food additives, flavorings, and processing aids. It is not structured as a simple "allowed vs. prohibited" list, but is more complex.

Every additive in it has two constraints. The first is product-specific: a substance is permitted in specific categories, not in food in general. Sodium nitrite is allowed in meat products but not in bread. The second is quantity-specific: for most items, a maximum level in milligrams per kilogram of finished product is specified. Some additives are marked for use "according to technical documentation," meaning in the minimum necessary amount—this is how substances are labeled if an excess would spoil the product before it could pose a risk.

Therefore, the question "is this additive allowed?" is almost always incomplete. It is allowed—where and how much? The same substance may be permitted in beverages but not in baby food, and this is a standard feature of the regulation, not an exception.

Where the acceptable intake figures come from

The maximum levels in the regulation are not pulled out of thin air. They are based on the ADI—Acceptable Daily Intake: the amount of a substance in milligrams per kilogram of body weight that can be consumed daily for a lifetime without expected harm.

It is calculated in reverse. Researchers take the highest dose at which no adverse effects were found in studies and divide it—usually by one hundred. This multiplier consists of two factors of ten: one for the extrapolation from animals to humans, and the second for the variation in sensitivity within the human population.

Here is how it looks for a specific substance. For benzoic acid and its salts (E210–E213), the reference point was a study on rats where four generations were exposed to a dose of 500 mg per kilogram of body weight per day without observed effects. By dividing by one hundred, European experts arrived at an ADI of 5 mg per kilogram. For an adult weighing 70 kg, this is 350 mg per day. The maximum level of benzoates in flavored non-alcoholic beverages is 150 mg per kilogram, meaning you could reach the limit with about two liters of such a drink—assuming it contains the maximum permitted amount of benzoate, and doing so day after day.

This example was not chosen by chance, and not only because the safety margin here is not infinite: when reviewing benzoates in 2016, European experts noted that in the group of children with high consumption, the estimated intake approaches the ADI. More importantly, the number itself is contested. In 2021, the joint WHO and FAO committee reviewed benzoates and established a group ADI of 0–20 mg per kilogram, explicitly withdrawing the previous 0–5. The difference is fourfold, and under this assessment, children's consumption stays well within the limit. Russian regulation follows the Codex line, i.e., the WHO and FAO committee, rather than the European agency. So, the "norm" is not a single number, but the position of a specific regulator, and it is worth checking whose it is. For intense sweeteners, the picture is the opposite—the gap between typical consumption and the limit is measured in multiples, which is discussed in our article on sugar substitutes. There is no single rule that "additives in food are always negligibly small"; it is calculated separately for each substance.

And one more property of the ADI, which is why it is often misinterpreted: it is a standard for lifetime daily intake, not a poisoning threshold. Exceeding it once is not an event; the question is always about the long-term average.

Lists change, and that is how the system works

The lists are not set in stone: a substance that has been on them for decades can be removed when new data or new methods emerge.

The most notable case in recent years is titanium dioxide, E171, a white colorant for glazes, candies, and chewing gum. In 2021, the European Food Safety Authority concluded that it could not rule out the genotoxicity of the particles, and therefore could not set a safe daily amount. Without an ADI, the additive loses its basis for use, and as of February 7, 2022, it cannot be used in food production in the EU. Products did not disappear from shelves on that same day: it was permitted to place already produced goods on the market until August 7, 2022, and products already on the shelf by that date could be sold until their expiration date. The colorant remained permitted in medicines. In the EAEU, E171 remains on the list of permitted additives under TR TS 029/2012.

A similar story, but without a ban, happened with nitrites. The EU adopted a regulation reducing maximum levels for meat products in October 2023, but the new limits did not take effect immediately: manufacturers were given two years, and they have been in force since October 2025, while for cheeses, they apply from October 2026, because the aging process takes up to two years. The purpose of the reduction is to have fewer nitrosamines while maintaining protection against botulism. You cannot directly compare "it was 150, now it is 80": along with the number, the unit of measurement was changed—previous levels were calculated based on sodium nitrite, while new ones are based on the nitrite ion.

The divergence in positions is explained prosaically: regulators rely on overlapping but different sets of studies and review substances on different timelines. A difference in the assessment of one additive is a standard working episode, not a sign of someone's dishonesty. The more general debate about whether the letter E means "chemicals" is analyzed in the article on myths about additives and GMOs.

Which lines are actually worth noticing

There is no need to read the entire ingredient list, but a few groups of codes provide practical information—not because they are "scary," but because they are associated with restrictions or confirmed effects for some people.

• Nitrites E249 and E250 in meat products. They are added not just for color; more importantly, nitrite suppresses Clostridium botulinum, and sausage without it becomes a different safety challenge. The flip side is that at high temperatures and in the acidic environment of the stomach, nitrites participate in the formation of nitrosamines. Hence the reduction in levels in the EU. The practical takeaway concerns not the choice between two sausages, but the total amount of processed meat in the diet.
• Sulfites E220–E228. One of two additives on the allergen list of TR TS 022/2011—the second is aspartame, discussed below. Sulfites must be indicated on the label if the total content exceeds 10 mg per kilogram or per liter in terms of sulfur dioxide. The reason is reactions in people with asthma, up to and including bronchospasm. It makes sense to look for this line in wine, light-colored dried apricots and other dried fruits that haven't darkened, and potato semi-finished products.
• Six colors: E102, E104, E110, E122, E124, E129. Products containing these must carry a warning that the colorant may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children. This requirement is in effect both in the EU and here—but it is written not in the additive regulation, but in TR TS 022/2011 on labeling, along with a caveat: the warning is not required for alcoholic beverages or where these colors are used to mark meat products or dye Easter eggs. The basis was a study of mixtures of these colors in children, published in 2007. The warning is not a ban, but a way to give parents a choice.
• Aspartame E951. It must be accompanied by the note "contains a source of phenylalanine." This is addressed to people with phenylketonuria—a hereditary metabolic disorder where phenylalanine accumulates and damages the nervous system. For everyone else, this line means nothing.
• Phosphates E338–E341, E450–E452. Usually, these go unnoticed, but they shouldn't—they are significant for those with chronic kidney disease. Phosphorus from additives is absorbed almost completely, whereas phosphorus bound to protein in meat and dairy is absorbed by about half. Therefore, when restricting phosphorus in a diet, one must count not only the products but also the codes.

The general rule for all five points: if a person has asthma, phenylketonuria, kidney disease, is pregnant, or is taking medication regularly, the question of specific additives should be resolved with a doctor, not by using a table on the internet. The list above is intended to help you know what to ask about.

How to use this at the store shelf

The procedure is short. The first digit of the code tells you why the substance is in the product. If that is not enough, the specific substance by code can be found in the additive directory—with its name, purpose, and status in Russia and the EU.

But starting your analysis of the ingredients with the codes is almost always the wrong approach. Ingredients are listed in descending order of mass, and the first three positions tell you more about the product than the entire list of additives; how to read this is analyzed separately—ingredients on the label. The most famous code from the 600s has its own story: why monosodium glutamate causes so much controversy is worth looking into before rejecting a product because of E621.

Count it from a photo

Frequently asked questions

What does the letter E in a product's ingredients mean?

It is an indicator of a unified list of food additives, which a substance is added to after a safety assessment. The letter says nothing about the origin: ascorbic acid (E300), pectin (E440), citric acid (E330), and beta-carotene (E160a) are all classified under E codes.

What do the numbers in E additive codes mean?

The first digit indicates the function. The 100s are colors, 200s are preservatives, 300s are antioxidants and acidity regulators, 400s are thickeners and emulsifiers, 600s are flavor enhancers, and 900s are glazing agents and sweeteners. The group says nothing about the safety of the substance.

Is it true that products "without E" have better ingredients?

Not necessarily. Labeling regulations allow a substance to be listed either by code or by name: "citric acid" and E330 are the same thing. The "without E" label describes the way the ingredients are recorded, not the ingredients themselves.

What is the acceptable daily intake of an additive?

This is the amount in milligrams per kilogram of body weight that can be consumed daily over a lifetime without expected harm. It is derived from the maximum dose that showed no effects in studies, usually divided by one hundred. This is a standard for long-term average intake, not a threshold for poisoning.

Why is an additive permitted in Russia but banned in Europe?

Regulators rely on overlapping but different sets of studies and review substances at different times. An example is titanium dioxide E171: it has been banned in food in the EU since February 2022 following a conclusion that genotoxicity could not be ruled out, but it remains in the TR TS 029/2012 list.

Read next

• Myths about food additives and GMOs — Two things on packaging cause the most fear: codes with the letter E and the acronym "GMO.
• How to read the ingredients list on a label: the rules governing its writing — A label looks like a list of words from which everyone reads something different: one person considers a long list of ingredients a red flag, another looks for E numbers.
• Monosodium glutamate: why E621 is feared more than other additives — Food additives have a general background of suspicion, but E621 stands apart: it is feared specifically, with symptoms and stories.

This article is for general information. It is not medical advice, a diagnosis, or a prescription for treatment or a diet, and it does not replace a consultation with your doctor. If you have a health condition, are pregnant, take medication, or follow a diet prescribed to you, decisions about food belong with your doctor.

Figures from regulations, guidelines and studies are given as they stood when this article was prepared and may since have changed; check them against the primary sources. This article is not advertising, an offer, or individual advice, and neither the author nor the site owner is responsible for decisions taken on the basis of it.