Toxic Baby Food Metal Poisoning Lawsuit

Toxic Baby Food Lawsuit Overview

Following the release of a Congressional report in early 2021 and a Bloomberg Law report in January 2023, it has been confirmed that many baby food products manufactured and sold by Gerber, Beech-Nut Nutrition, Plum, Hain, Campbell, Walmart, Sprout and other companies contain dangerous levels of heavy metals.

The products have been found to contain one or more heavy metals including arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury that may increase the risk of autism or ADHD in children.

How to File a Baby Food Lawsuit

Product liability lawyers are pursuing toxic baby food lawsuits for families of children who were fed the impacted brands for at least one year, and developed any of the following injuries:

• Autism diagnosed between ages of 2 and 14
• Severe ADHD diagnosed between ages of 8 and 14

To file a baby food Autism or ADHD lawsuit, submit information for a product liability lawyer to review. All cases are handled on a contingency fee basis, which means there are no fees unless your case is won.

2024 Toxic baby Food Lawsuit Updates

• April 11, 2024 Update: the JPML issued a transfer order (PDF) on April 11, indicating all baby food toxic metal injury lawsuits will be consolidated for discovery and pretrial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California under District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley.
• January 4, 2024 Update: An increase in toxic baby food lawsuits across various U.S. District Courts has prompted a group of plaintiffs to submit a transfer motion (PDF) to the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), asking for the claims to be consolidated under one judge to streamline the discovery process and pretrial activities.

Toxic Baby Food Multidistrict Litigation

A steadily growing number of toxic baby food heavy metals lawsuits have been filed by families of children diagnosed with autism or ADHD, each raising similar allegations that manufacturers played on the parents’ trust that products would be safe, concealing the levels of toxic elements present for years.

With at least 11 baby food lawsuits pending throughout the federal court system as of January 2024, a group of plaintiffs filed a motion to transfer with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) on January 4, 2024, requesting that the claims be transferred before one judge for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.

After hearing oral arguments in late March, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a transfer order on April 11. This order consolidates all baby food lawsuits related to injuries from toxic metals for discovery and pretrial proceedings. The cases will be handled in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, and will be overseen by District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley.

As additional claims are filed throughout 2024 and 2025, it is expected that Judge Corley will establish a “bellwether” strategy, where the parties will select a small group of representative cases to serve as early test trials, which typically help the parties gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that is likely to be repeated throughout the litigation.

Baby Food Problems and Side Effects

In February 2021, a House Oversight Committee report (PDF) revealed that many leading baby food products sold in recent years contain high amounts of toxic heavy metals, including inorganic arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury, which may increase the risk of childhood development problems, such as autism spectrum disorders and severe ADHD (attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder).

In September 2021, a follow up report (PDF) released by the same Congressional subcommittee outlined more evidence about the problems with arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury metals in toxic baby food, as lawmakers and consumer advocates call for new limits to be put in place and to require manufacturers to warn parents about the risks.

Despite the calls to action, a January 2023 investigative report published by Bloomberg Law confirmed toxic metals were still heavily present in many popular baby food products, indicating manufacturers failed to take corrective action after the contamination risks were known.

Currently, the FDA does not set allowable limits on the presence of toxic heavy metals in baby food products. However, when compared to limits in bottled water and drinking water, most of the leading brands of baby food products may exceed those limits, sometimes by hundreds of times the recommended amounts.

These heavy metals are known to be toxic and could potentially cause developmental disorders when consistently fed to infants, who are the most vulnerable to their metal poisoning side effects.

In January 2023, the FDA proposed new action levels for lead in baby food products, as part of its Close to Zero program, which seeks to eliminate toxic heavy metals from baby food,

Reports Finding Toxic Metal In Baby Food

A number of reports and studies have warned about the high amounts of these toxic metal in baby food products sold nationwide. This includes a secret slideshow presentation sent to the FDA by someone within Hain, which revealed the company knowingly was low-balling the amount of arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury in its products, and revealed the company was only testing ingredients and not finished products.

2021 Congressional Subcommittee Findings

In February 2021, a report by staffers in the U.S. House of Representatives confirmed that leading brands of baby food products are tainted with sometimes extremely high levels of toxic metals, which can cause permanent IQ decreases and an increased risk of criminal activity and antisocial behavior in children doe to their effects on brain function.

The report warned that even with the findings, only four of the seven leading manufacturers complied with Congress’s request for data, and raised concerns that baby food products made by those who didn’t participate, including Walmart, Sprout and Campbell’s, may contain even higher levels of the toxic heavy metals.

Among those who did reply, the findings alarmed lawmakers. For example, Beech-Nut used ingredients which contained as high as 913.4 parts per billion (ppb) of arsenic in some of their products. The maximum allowable amount of arsenic in bottled water is 10 ppb. It also used ingredients containing 887 ppb of lead, which also has a 5 ppb limit in bottled water. The company’s internal standards allowed the highest levels of arsenic, cadmium and lead of any company tested.

2023 Toxic Baby Food Report

On January 5, 2023, Bloomberg Law released the results of an investigative report which tested 33 popular baby food products for several heavy metals known to increase autism and ADHD risks in infant and children.

Bloomberg researchers purchased 33 baby food products in July 2022, and had an accredited laboratory test the products for levels of organic arsenic, inorganic arsenic, cadmium, and lead. The report found all 33 baby food products tested positive for at least one toxic heavy metal, while 32 of the 33 contained at least two of the toxic heavy metals. 

Some of the baby food that tested positive for multiple heavy metal contaminates included;

Plum Organics Superpuffs – Blueberry with Purple Sweet Potato

• 90 ppb inorganic Arsenic
• 90 ppb cadmium
• 90 ppb lead

Gerber Grain and Grow Banana Puffs

• 60 ppb inorganic arsenic
• 90 ppb cadmium

Walmart (Parent’s Choice) Organic Strawberry Rice Rusks

• 30 ppb inorganic Arsenic
• 50 ppb lead

Baby Food Settlements for Autism and ADHD

As a result of the failure to thoroughly test, limit and report the levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury in baby food products, financial compensation may be available to parents who fed these products to their children through a baby food lawsuit.

Financial compensation may also be available for parents of children who consumed one of the brands for at least a year and developed autism or ADHD and were diagnosed between the ages of 2 and 14.

If information about the levels of toxic heavy metal had been provided, and the potential health risks, many parents would have likely chosen another baby food to feed to their vulnerable infants, which may have avoided numerous developmental disorders.