Golden State Today

California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a settlement with Mead Johnson Nutrition Co. and Mead Johnson & Co., LLC, resolving allegations that the company sold infant and toddler formulas without required warnings for lead exposure. This is a violation of Proposition 65 and the Unfair Competition Law. As part of the settlement, Mead Johnson will pay nearly $2 million, which includes payments for violations, reimbursement of legal costs, and funding for an environmental project aimed at reducing other sources of lead exposure.

Attorney General Bonta stated, "Prior to the filing of the People’s complaint, several of Mead Johnson’s infant and toddler formula products had been exposing children to elevated lead levels without a Proposition 65 warning." He added that this settlement underscores his office's commitment to holding corporations accountable under state laws.

San Francisco District Attorney Brooke Jenkins emphasized the significance of this milestone in reducing lead exposure for California consumers. "In addition to establishing a maximum lead level that is lower than other applicable standards, the judgment also sets aside funds to help financially eligible families reduce their exposure to lead," Jenkins said.

Alameda District Attorney Pamela Price highlighted the benefits for local residents: "This judgment creates strong new protections and provides funds to assist eligible families in reducing their potential lead exposures."

Sonoma County District Attorney Carla Rodriguez noted the collaborative effort with Mead Johnson: "We were able to work collaboratively with Mead Johnson to quickly reformulate their product to reduce levels of lead."

The investigation by state authorities found that over 50 brands of formula sold in California contained lead at levels requiring a Proposition 65 warning. However, Mead Johnson failed to provide such warnings. Following notification from investigators, Mead Johnson worked with authorities to minimize lead levels in its products by changing ingredient sourcing among other measures.

The settlement requires Mead Johnson to pay $850,000 under Proposition 65 and the Unfair Competition Law, $470,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs reimbursement, and $850,000 towards an environmental project targeting reduced lead levels in home drinking water. Additionally, injunctive terms mandate that Mead Johnson consult with an independent food quality auditor and conduct compliance testing.