Texas sues Gerber, Nestle over toxic heavy metals in baby food
Synopsis
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has sued Gerber and Nestle USA, alleging the baby food giant used rice flour with arsenic levels more than nine times the federal drinking-water limit between 2017 and 2019 — while marketing its products as safe and rigorously tested. The suit could reshape heavy-metal disclosure standards for the entire US baby food industry.
Key Takeaways
Texas AG Ken Paxton filed suit against Gerber and Nestle USA on 15 October 2025 under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
The state alleges Gerber used 67 batches of rice flour with arsenic levels reportedly more than 9 times the federal bottled-water limit between 2017 and 2019 .
Cadmium in carrots allegedly reached 17 times the bottled-water benchmark; lead in sweet potatoes was nearly 10 times that standard.
A 2021 Alaska laboratory test allegedly found two Gerber rice cereal samples exceeding the federal arsenic limit for that product.
Rival Beech-Nut recalled its infant rice cereal over arsenic concerns; Gerber did not issue a comparable recall, the lawsuit alleges.
The case follows a prior Texas–Plum settlement requiring strict heavy-metal testing and public disclosure.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has filed a lawsuit against baby food manufacturer Gerber and its parent company Nestle USA, alleging that the companies misled parents about the safety of their products by concealing potentially dangerous levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium, and other toxic heavy metals. The suit was announced on Wednesday, 15 October 2025, local time.
What the Lawsuit Alleges
The legal action was filed under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which bars businesses from making false or misleading representations to consumers. According to the Attorney General's Office, Gerber marketed its baby food products as safe, rigorously tested, and recommended by paediatricians — even as internal testing, the state alleges, showed elevated concentrations of toxic substances in certain ingredients.
Specifically, the lawsuit claims that between 2017 and 2019, Gerber used 67 batches of rice flour containing arsenic at concentrations reportedly more than nine times the federal limit for bottled drinking water. Testing also allegedly found cadmium concentrations in carrots reaching 17 times that benchmark, and lead concentrations in sweet potatoes nearly 10 times that standard. Notably, these comparisons are drawn against drinking-water standards, not regulatory limits specific to baby food ingredients.
The state further alleges that Gerber rarely tested its products for mercury and, during much of the period under scrutiny, tested selected ingredients rather than finished foods actually consumed by infants.
Paxton's Statement
'Gerber promised parents its food was safe and rigorously tested. Its own tests showed toxic metals in the food,' Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement. 'When a company makes promises about what parents feed their babies, I will hold it accountable to ensure those promises are kept,' he added.
Health Risks and Prior Actions
The Attorney General's Office noted that arsenic, lead, and mercury are neurotoxic substances that pose serious health risks — particularly to infants and young children whose brains and nervous systems are still developing. The state also cited a 2021 test conducted by an Alaska laboratory, which allegedly identified two samples of Gerber rice cereal exceeding the federal arsenic limit applicable to that product.
The lawsuit draws a pointed comparison with rival manufacturer Beech-Nut, which subsequently recalled its infant rice cereal and discontinued the product after separate arsenic-related testing concerns arose. Texas alleges that Gerber did not issue a comparable recall or warning and continued selling its products. The Attorney General's Office noted that Gerber had previously recalled products over plastic contamination and choking hazards, but had never recalled baby food due to heavy metal contamination.
The QR Code Disclosure Dispute
The lawsuit also challenges Gerber's current disclosure practices. Texas authorities acknowledged that Gerber now makes testing information available through QR codes on product labels, but argued this falls short of adequately addressing allegedly misleading safety claims prominently displayed on the packaging itself. The state maintains that consumers should not be required to seek out additional technical information to determine whether products marketed for infants carry potential health risks.
Context and What's Next
The case follows an earlier settlement between Texas and baby food manufacturer Plum, under which Plum committed to testing products for heavy metals, observing strict concentration limits, and publishing its testing data. The allegations in the Gerber-Nestle case have not been adjudicated, and the announcement does not establish that either company violated consumer protection laws. Responses from Gerber or Nestle USA were not included in the Attorney General's statement, and their positions on the lawsuit could not be independently established from available material. The case is expected to set a significant precedent for how baby food companies are required to disclose heavy metal testing results to consumers across the United States.
Point of View
Yet voluntary action has been uneven. The suit's sharpest edge is not the contamination allegation itself but the claim that Gerber's own internal data showed the problem while its marketing said the opposite. If that internal-testing evidence holds up in court, it transforms this from a product-safety case into a deliberate-deception case — a far harder reputational and financial exposure for Nestle. The QR-code disclosure defence also raises a broader question mainstream coverage is understating: is burying test data behind a smartphone scan genuinely transparent, or is it a liability management tactic dressed as consumer empowerment?
NationPress
15 Oct 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
Why has Texas sued Gerber and Nestle over baby food?
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed suit alleging that Gerber and its parent company Nestle USA misled parents by marketing baby food as safe and rigorously tested while internal testing allegedly revealed toxic heavy metals — including arsenic, lead, and cadmium — in certain ingredients at elevated concentrations. The lawsuit was filed under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
What levels of toxic metals were allegedly found in Gerber baby food?
According to the lawsuit, between 2017 and 2019, Gerber used 67 batches of rice flour containing arsenic at concentrations more than nine times the federal limit for bottled drinking water. Cadmium in carrots allegedly reached 17 times that benchmark, and lead in sweet potatoes was nearly 10 times the same standard. These comparisons are against drinking-water limits, not food-specific regulatory thresholds.
Did Gerber recall any products over heavy metal contamination?
No. According to the Texas Attorney General's Office, Gerber had previously recalled products due to plastic contamination and choking hazards, but has not issued a recall over heavy metal contamination. The lawsuit contrasts this with rival Beech-Nut, which recalled and discontinued its infant rice cereal after separate arsenic-related testing concerns.
Have the allegations against Gerber and Nestle been proven?
No. The allegations have not been adjudicated in court, and the lawsuit announcement does not establish that Gerber or Nestle USA violated consumer protection laws. Responses from either company were not included in the Attorney General's statement at the time of announcement.
What is the background to this legal action?
The Gerber-Nestle suit follows an earlier Texas settlement with baby food manufacturer Plum, under which Plum committed to rigorous heavy-metal testing, strict concentration limits, and public disclosure of results. A 2021 US House subcommittee report had previously identified widespread heavy-metal concerns across the baby food industry, prompting increased regulatory and legal scrutiny.
