Texas AG Ken Paxton Launches Industry-Wide Investigation into Heavy Metal Content of Protein Powders

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced that he will conduct an investigation into protein powder manufacturers. The investigation comes after an independent third-party investigation conducted by Consumer Reports last year which found that lead, cadmium, and arsenic were present in several popular protein powders.

“Protein is a vital macronutrient for human health, and Texans deserve clean protein powders without having to worry whether the products contain heavy metals or other harmful chemicals,” said Paxton. “Far too many corporations have snuck harmful ingredients in their products, and I am committed to doing everything I can to help make America healthy again.”

Paxton said that, by selling protein powders in the state without disclosing known information about heavy metal content, manufacturers may have been acting in violation of a Texas state law called the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). The investigation will examine “whether companies falsely marketed or misrepresented the safety and contents of their products.”

Paxton noted that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports that there is no known safe level of lead exposure, and does not enforce a federal limit with a strict action level for heavy metals in dietary supplements.

Consumer Reports: Two-Thirds of Products Exceed California’s Prop 65 Threshold

In October 2025, the nonprofit organization Consumer Reports tested a panel of 23 popular protein powders, finding that two-thirds of the tested products contained levels of lead that were above California’s Proposition 65 threshold, which is considered one of the strictest right-to-know chemical safety standards globally.

Plant-based products, on average, contained nine times the amount of lead as dairy proteins, and around twice as much as beef-based proteins.

At the time, trade associations and protein companies pointed out that detectable levels of heavy metals are a nearly unavoidable agricultural challenge, and that while no federal thresholds for heavy metal content exist, many products are tested to ensure that their heavy metal content meets safety thresholds established by testing companies like NSF.  

The Natural Products Association described Consumer Reports’ claims as “alarmist, misleading, and unscientific,” noting that the levels they reported as safety concerns were “far below amounts present in many foods, including some fruits and vegetables.” Further, the Council for Responsible Nutrition noted at the time that Consumer Reports didn’t provide any information about its testing methodology, calling the accuracy of the results it reported into question.

The investigation was cited as a leading motivating factor in a California State Senate bill introduced earlier this year, which would require protein powder manufacturers to publicly disclose heavy metal testing results for their products. The bill’s requirements are similar to a law the state enacted last year requiring that the manufacturers of supplements and baby foods intended for children 2 years and younger publicly disclose heavy metal testing results.

NPA Requests Meeting with Texas AG’s Office

NPA requested a meeting with Paxton’s office, with the goal of having a discussion about the framework of federal regulations surrounding protein powders labeled as both foods and as dietary supplements.  

‘It is critical that regulators hear directly from experts who understand the science, the law, and the manufacturing standards already in place to protect consumers,” the trade association stated. “NPA has a longstanding record of challenging incomplete data, misleading headlines, or testing methods that do not reflect the safeguards responsible manufacturers use every day to protect American consumers.”

In the letter, Daniel Fabricant, PhD, president and CEO of NPA, noted that federal law (21 CFR part 111) requires protein manufacturers to operate under current good manufacturing practices (cGMPs), which ensure that dietary supplements meet established identity, purity, strength, and composition standards. These standards, Fabricant noted, include limits on heavy metals and other contaminants. Similarly, protein powders labeled as foods are required to adhere to 21 CFR Part 117, which covers cGMPs, hazard analysis, and risk-based preventive controls.

“We share your commitment to consumer safety and take the risks of heavy metal exposure seriously,” Fabricant wrote. “That shared concern, however, counsels caution about the evidentiary foundation for this investigation. The third-party testing data cited by your office, generated by the Clean Label Project, does not account for the robust safeguards our members implement throughout their manufacturing process, nor does it reflect the scientific consensus of the federal agencies that Congress has charged with regulating dietary supplements. Critically, the Clean Label Project has a documented history of withholding its full testing methodologies, which substantially undermines its reliability as an authoritative source.”

Fabricant cited an investigation conducted by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman into four major retailers selling herbal supplements. Schneiderman alleged based on prior reports from the University of Guelph that, according to DNA barcoding analysis, products didn’t contain the plants listed on labels. However, the paper was retracted for failing to confirm the results using established, consensus-based methods. “Those unfortunate missteps could have been avoided if the NYAG had followed our advice and consulted with relevant experts in the field regarding the industry’s best practices, proper testing methods, and applicable federal regulations.”