Texas sues Gerber and Nestlé over heavy metals in baby food
Filed in Collin County under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the civil action concerns Gerber’s marketing of infant and toddler foods as safe, nutritious and rigorously tested. State prosecutors allege that internal laboratory records identified inorganic arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury in raw materials and finished batches.
The complaint seeks statutory penalties that could exceed $10m, together with an order permanently preventing the companies from making misleading nutritional or safety claims. The allegations have not been established in court.
According to the filing, quality records covering 2017 and subsequent compliance periods showed some batches with heavy-metal concentrations, measured in parts per billion, above federal reference levels used for drinking water and infant nutrition. The complaint says Gerber did not begin voluntary recalls in response to those results.
Gerber added QR codes to some packaging in 2025 to meet California disclosure requirements. The codes allow consumers to access batch-level heavy-metal testing information. Texas officials argue that this disclosure does not address what they describe as misleading point-of-sale claims that present the products as unconditionally safe and beneficial to child development.
The case follows an investigation by the Texas attorney general’s office into major infant-food brands. That inquiry resulted in a binding settlement with Plum Organics in 2025. Under that agreement, Plum Organics accepted requirements covering heavy-metal testing, contaminant limits and publication of testing data.
Nestlé has rejected the allegations. The company says its infant-nutrition products comply with applicable Food and Drug Administration safety rules and action levels. Nestlé also says that trace amounts of arsenic, lead and cadmium can occur naturally in soil and water, and can be absorbed by crops such as rice, sweet potatoes and carrots.
Texas prosecutors and plaintiffs in related federal multi-district litigation contend that large food processors can use their purchasing networks to obtain ingredients from lower-contaminant areas, replace higher-risk rice inputs and impose stricter rejection standards at manufacturing sites. The lawsuit covers products including fortified cereals, fruit-and-yoghurt blends and milk-based snacks for toddlers.
