This Study on Lead in Baby Food Is Bullshit
New research shows that our children consume lead and other pollutants in baby food and formula. But there is something fishy about this study. First, it comes from a group advocating for “transparency” labeling … but hiding all their data.
Caption : In a new study (USA Today), these infant formula and formula tested positive for arsenic, lead and BPA.
History : Lead and other toxic substances would be a real problem if present in baby food. This is also not a far-fetched idea – for example, California found lead in candy that is sold in grocery stores . So this could potentially be important and perhaps even daunting research. The study was conducted by the nonprofit Clean Label Project , which claims it “[uses] data and science to uncover the true content of America’s top-selling consumer products.”
The problem is, I don’t know what they studied and how. You can’t either.
I eagerly clicked on their “methodology” page. It contains no methodology . I was expecting something like what the EWG is doing with its Dirty Dozen pesticide-contaminated food list, in which evidence is processed through analysis. I disagree with the importance of the EWG results and am concerned about their conflicts of interest , but at least they have a methodology that they explain. On the other hand, the Clean Label project doesn’t explain anything. You see, they test things in laboratories. What laboratories? What are their criteria or limitations? How did they choose what to test for? All riddles. The results for each product have a five-star rating with no explanation of what the tests actually found. It’s like Yelp reviews, no reviews.
The organization did find the numbers when it was time to summarize the dangers to news outlets. “The researchers found that 65% of the products tested positive for arsenic, 36% for lead, 58% for cadmium and 10% for acrylamide,” USA Today reports, without any reference to whether they found these contaminants at dangerous levels or not. Lead is not at a safe level, but this is not the case for the other chemicals mentioned. Clean Label Project Tip: If you report toxic results without mentioning the dose, you don’t know what the hell you are doing.
So why is there a Clean Label project? From this it looks like they are trying to emulate the strategy of the Environment Working Group of identifying possibly real problems and then over-increasing the number of clicks. (Remember, the EWG is behind dubious reports of sunscreens , vegetables, and tap water .) And just like the EWG, the Clean Label project has a huge conflict of interest: they put a buy now button on every product in their results. database, even the product that tops their top five .
Yes, and it looks like they are planning to issue – possibly sell – a seal of approval to companies that are doing well.
Takeaway : If there is anything dangerous in baby food, the Clean Label project is not the place to find out.