Lawsuit Claims Toxic Metals in Parent’s Choice Baby Food Sold at Walmart Caused Autism

An Indiana woman has filed a product liability lawsuit against Walmart, and several other leading food manufacturers, indicating her child developed autism from regular consumption of toxic metals in the manufacturer’s baby food products.

The complaint (PDF) was filed by Miranda Hernandez on behalf of her minor child, N.G.H., in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on January 24, naming Walmart, Inc., Beech-Nut Nutrition Company, Gerber Products Company, Hero A.G., Nestlé S.A., and other unnamed companies as defendants.

Since Congress highlighted concerns about contaminants in baby food in April 2021, parents have grown increasingly alarmed about the presence of toxic metals in these products. The report revealed widespread contamination, with many popular baby food products containing levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury far exceeding the limits set for bottled water, recording 91 times the arsenic limit, 177 times the lead limit, 69 times the cadmium limit, and five times the mercury limit.

The report warned that infant exposure to heavy metals like arsenic, lead, cadmium and mercury is linked to a heightened risk of serious developmental disorders. Specifically, exposure to these toxins has been associated with an increased likelihood of autism and ADHD, as well as other cognitive and behavioral issues that can affect a child’s development and long-term health.

While health experts and regulators have since called for manufacturers to remove these kinds of contaminants from their products, recent testing has shown that toxic heavy metals in baby foods remain a problem. A report published last year found that popular baby food brands sold by Gerber, Beech-Nut, Sprout, Walmart and others still have potentially dangerous levels of arsenic, cadmium and lead, all of which can increase the risk of neurological side effects for children.

Hernandez’ complaint joins a growing number of similar toxic baby food lawsuits filed in recent months. These lawsuits collectively allege that manufacturers exploited parents’ trust by marketing their products as safe while concealing the presence of dangerous levels of toxic metals for years.

Miranda Hernandez claims that from October 1, 2010, to March 1, 2014, she unknowingly purchased and fed her child baby food products containing toxic heavy metals, including Walmart’s Parent’s Choice brand.

The complaint alleges that Walmart set specifications for toxic heavy metals like lead and arsenic in its baby food products, but failed to enforce these standards. Hernandez claims that Walmart did not require its suppliers to submit test results for these metals, nor did it conduct its own independent testing.

Furthermore, before December 2018, Walmart’s specifications were inconsistently applied, covering only certain baby foods and excluding others entirely from toxic metal limits, the lawsuit states. Post-2018, the complaint claims that Walmart further relaxed its standards, allowing up to 100 ppb of inorganic arsenic in all dry baby foods, thereby increasing the risk to infant health.

“Walmart refused to cooperate with the House Subcommittee’s investigation into its baby foods products, and as such, the Subcommittee was ‘greatly concerned’ that Walmart ‘might be obscuring the presence of higher levels of toxic metals in their baby food products,’” Hernandez stated. “The Subcommittee noted that independent data from the (Happy Babies Bright Future) Report confirmed that Walmart’s baby foods are indeed tainted.”

Hernandez claims that Walmart and the other defendants knowingly exposed infants to toxic heavy metals without warning consumers or implementing adequate safety measures, which has caused her child to develop Autism and potentially ADHD.

January 2025 Toxic Baby Food Lawsuit Update

Late last week, Judge Corley issued an order (PDF) addressing several procedural matters, and confirmed the directions given during the last case management order held on January 23, 2025.

The court has set a deadline of February 21, 2025, for all parties to agree on the format of the Short Form Complaint, which aims to simplify the management of numerous lawsuits. If the parties cannot agree, they will need to bring the issues before the court to decide. This effort is part of a larger attempt to make the handling of these cases more efficient by standardizing some of the procedures.

Additionally, the court has issued guidelines for resolving future disputes over evidence collection, urging all involved to thoroughly discuss and try to resolve their issues before asking the court to step in.

The next case management conference has been set for February 27, 2025, in which the court will review the Short Form Complaint and tackle any outstanding problems. This session will also include critical hearings on motions to dismiss some of the claims, which could significantly influence the direction of the litigation.