“We appreciate your attention to your obligation to consider potential chemical hazards, including toxic elements, when conducting a risk analysis,” wrote Susan Mayne, director of the FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, and Dr. Janet Woodcock, representative FDA’s Commissioner of Food and Medicines, in a letter addressed to all manufacturers and processors of baby food and small children.
“This represents a welcome change at the FDA,” said Krishnamoorthi. “However, we are disappointed that the FDA has failed to establish concrete rules for removing toxic heavy metals from all baby foods. This highlights the need for Congress to pass legislation with strict standards and deadlines.
“Babies don’t have time to wait for the FDA to fill in the details. Parents: I encourage them to continue to push for progress with us,” he said.
In the announcement, the FDA warned manufacturers that exposure to toxic elements in the food supply would be taken “extremely seriously, especially when it comes to protecting the health and safety of the youngest and most vulnerable of the population”.
The reaction of the defense groups to the action of the FDA was lukewarm.
“I think it is a positive step – but limited. I am disappointed that there is no timetable for action,” said Tom Neltner, director of health chemicals policy at the Environmental Defense Fund.
“In the absence of applicable standards and deadlines, this is hardly what any of us would call progress,” said Scott Faber, senior vice president for government affairs at the EWG, or the Environmental Working Group.
Food companies are already required by law to look for risks, “including metals in baby foods, and to adopt changes in the way they make food and source ingredients to reduce or eliminate those risks,” said Faber.
“The law is very clear, but we doubt that baby food companies are following this provision. We also doubt that the FDA is complying with it. So today’s announcement may indicate that the FDA will actually examine food safety plans to assess what they’re doing, “he said.
“The devil is in the details,” said Jane Houlihan, national director of science and health at Healthy Babies Bright Futures, a coalition of advocates committed to reducing babies’ exposure to neurotoxic chemicals.
“Although the update and the letter are vague, the FDA is signaling its intention to take a series of actions to reduce children’s exposure to toxic heavy metals,” she said.
“For significant and significant exposure reductions, the FDA must set applicable health-based limits for toxic heavy metals in foods that represent the highest exposures, including foods and snacks based on rice, juices, infant cereals and vegetables root, “said Houlihan.
Internal documents showed ‘dangerous’ levels
“Dangerous levels of toxic metals like arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury exist in baby foods at levels that exceed what experts and government agencies say is permissible,” Rep. Krishnamoorthi told CNN when the report was released.
Whether the baby food was organic or not, it didn’t matter, the subcommittee concluded – the levels of toxic metals were still high.
Krishnamoorthi said the spreadsheets provided by the manufacturers are “shocking” because they show evidence that some baby foods contain hundreds of parts per billion of dangerous metals.
“However, we know that, in many cases, we should have nothing more than one-digit parts per billion of any of these metals in any of our foods,” he told CNN.
Not fully cooperative
Three other baby food companies did not fully cooperate with the subcommittee’s investigation, according to the report: Sprout Organic Foods; Walmart, which sells Parent’s Choice baby food; and Campbell Soup Company, which sells the Plum Organics brand of baby products.
“The Subcommittee is very concerned that its lack of cooperation may be obscuring the presence of even higher levels of toxic heavy metals in its baby food products than those of its competitors,” the report said.
At the time, a Campbell spokesman told CNN that the company had complied, a statement that the subcommittee contradicted in the report:
“Instead of producing any substantive information, Campbell provided a self-reported spreadsheet stating that each of its products ‘meets the criteria’,” wrote the subcommittee in its investigation.
After the report was published, Walmart also told CNN that it had completed the subcommittee’s investigation, which a spokesman for the subcommittee said was false at the time of the report. Sprout Organic Foods did not respond to CNN’s request for comment.
A spokesman for the subcommittee told CNN on Friday that Walmart and Campbell have already provided internal documents on toxic metal levels to the subcommittee. These documents are currently being analyzed. Sprout Organic Foods asked for an extension, which was granted.
Worrying chemicals for children
“There was a time when we used metals as a prevalent pesticide for many years, assuming it was safe,” said Dr. Leonardo Trasande, head of environmental pediatrics at NYU Langone.
From conception to 2 years of age, babies have an extremely high sensitivity to neurotoxic chemicals, said Jane Houlihan, national director of science and health at Healthy Babies Bright Futures.
“Your brain is forming quickly and therefore when they are exposed to metals that can disrupt these natural processes, impacts range from behavioral problems to aggression to loss of IQ and all types of cognitive and behavioral deficits that can persist over time of life, “Houlihan said.
“Kilo by kilo, babies receive the highest dose of these heavy metals compared to other parts of the population,” she said. “So the consequences are serious.”
Legislation may still be necessary
The Congressional investigation suggested a series of regulatory actions that could be taken by the FDA.
Rather than setting limits for one food at a time, the FDA should standardize maximum levels for each toxic metal that can damage a baby’s developing brain and apply them to all foods, the report said.
There should be mandatory testing of any baby food product before it hits the shelves, the subcommittee recommended. Manufacturers should no longer be allowed to simply test ingredients.
Substitutes must be found for any ingredients above the recommended limits and, if not, the food or ingredient should not be used in the baby’s food, the subcommittee said. Take rice, for example, which is the main source of exposure to inorganic arsenic for babies.
“Every baby food maker … is aware that we in Congress are no longer going to sit down and accept the status quo,” Krishnamoorthi told CNN last month.
On Thursday, Krishnamoorthi, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Democratic Senator Tammy Duckworth of Illinois and Democratic Representative Tony Cárdenas of California announced that they had drafted a bill they submitted to the FDA.
They asked the agency to respond with “technical guidance to strengthen the effectiveness of the legislation”.
“It is unacceptable that, despite parents’ efforts to keep their children safe, some leading baby food manufacturers have placed products on the market that expose children to dangerous toxins,” Klobuchar said in a press release.
“This legislation will protect children and ensure that they get off to a healthy start by making manufacturers responsible for removing toxins from baby and toddler food. I will continue to strive to give parents the peace of mind they deserve,” she said.