Consumer Reports' Protein Lead Report, One Year Later: What Actually Changed
Direct Answer: What changed in the year since Consumer Reports' protein lead report?
The courts moved and the legislature didn't. Since Consumer Reports published its lead testing on October 14, 2025, at least seven proposed class actions have been filed against protein brands and retailers. California's SB 1033 testing-and-disclosure bill stalled in committee in May 2026 and did not become law. None of the products named in the suits has been recalled. And among people using our safety quiz, the share who knew about Consumer Reports' testing rose from 30% to 54%. Jump to our data →
A year ago today, Consumer Reports told protein buyers that most of the powders and shakes it tested carried more lead per serving than it considers safe to consume daily. This site was built around that report. One year on, here's what actually happened, sticking to what we can document.
What Consumer Reports Found in October 2025
Consumer Reports tested 23 protein powders and ready-to-drink shakes for lead and other heavy metals. Its benchmark is a daily level of concern of 0.5 µg of lead, the same figure California uses for Prop 65 warnings. The headline results:
- More than two-thirds of the products exceeded that level in a single serving.
- Plant-based proteins averaged about nine times more lead than dairy (whey) proteins.
- The worst result, Naked Nutrition's Vegan Mass Gainer, measured 7.7 µg per serving, roughly 1,570% of the level of concern.
- A handful of products, mostly whey, cleared it comfortably. MuscleTech's mass gainer had no detectable lead.
Consumer Reports added five more products in a January 2026 follow-up round. Every brand and result we track is in our full ranked list.
The Courts: Seven Class Actions in Twelve Months
The clearest consequence of the report has been litigation. Several complaints cite Consumer Reports' findings directly, and the first was filed within weeks of publication.
| Filed | Defendant & product | Court | Metal(s) alleged |
|---|---|---|---|
| Late Oct 2025 | Naked Nutrition — Vegan Mass Gainer | California federal court | Lead |
| Dec 16, 2025 | Garden of Life — Organic Plant-Based Protein | C.D. Cal. (No. 5:25-cv-03118) | Lead |
| Jan 26, 2026 | Jocko Fuel — Mölk chocolate shake | S.D.N.Y. (No. 1:26-cv-00659) | Cadmium |
| Feb 9, 2026 | Jocko Fuel — Chocolate Milkshake powder | S.D. Cal. (No. 3:26-cv-00791) | Lead |
| Mar 11, 2026 | Quest Nutrition — RTD protein shakes | L.A. Superior Court (No. 26STCV07966) | Lead (Prop 65) |
| Jul 7, 2026 | Costco — Orgain Organic Protein | W.D. Wash. (No. 2:26-cv-02364) | Lead, cadmium, arsenic |
| Jul 31, 2026 | Amazon — Orgain Organic Protein | W.D. Wash. | Lead, cadmium, arsenic |
Three patterns stand out:
- The target shifted from brands to retailers. The two most recent suits name Costco and Amazon rather than Orgain itself, on the theory that the seller had a duty to disclose what testing could detect.
- Lead isn't the only metal. One of the two Jocko suits is about cadmium alone, and both Orgain suits allege lead, cadmium and arsenic.
- Nothing has been decided. As of today we found no ruling on the merits, settlement or certified class in any of these cases. Costco has moved to dismiss, arguing that "clean" marketing is puffery rather than a promise of no heavy metals. The judge hasn't ruled.
The Legislature: SB 1033 Stalled
California came closest to turning the report into law. SB 1033, introduced by Sen. Steve Padilla on February 11, 2026 and co-sponsored by Consumer Reports and the Environmental Working Group, would have required protein makers to test for heavy metals, publish the results, and stop selling noncompliant products in California from January 1, 2028.
- March 25, 2026: passed the Senate Health Committee 10–0.
- April 22, 2026: passed the Senate Environmental Quality Committee.
- May 4, 2026: placed on the Senate Appropriations suspense file.
- May 14, 2026: held in committee and under submission.
"Held under submission" on the suspense file is how California bills typically stop moving without a recorded vote against them. 2026 was the second year of the 2025–26 session, so SB 1033 did not advance this session. It would need to be reintroduced in 2027. There is still no federal or state law requiring heavy-metal testing or disclosure for protein powder.
Our Data: How Readers Changed Over the Year
CleanProteinList.com runs two on-site instruments: a 60-second safety quiz (360 deduplicated responses, January 23 to October 12, 2026) and a one-question brand poll on every article (3,150 deduplicated brand responses, January to October 2026). Neither is a random sample of protein buyers; see the limits below. They can show how the people researching this topic changed over the year.
1. Awareness of the testing nearly doubled
The quiz asks: "Were you aware of heavy metal testing in protein powders?" Comparing the first four months of 2026 with the period since:
That's a 24-point rise in less than a year. With these sample sizes it's well beyond what random variation would produce. We can't separate how much comes from wider public awareness and how much from a changing mix of visitors, such as people arriving from lawsuit coverage already knowing the background. Either way, by mid-2026 most people looking into this had already heard about the testing.
2. From "is mine safe?" to "what's cleanest?"
Behavior shifted along with awareness:
- The share whose main concern was "Show me the absolute cleanest proteins" rose from 11% to 20%. "Is my current brand safe?" is still the most common answer, but it fell from 78% to 68%.
- The share who said "I'm just researching brands", rather than reporting a current routine, rose from 8% to 21%.
Taken together: fewer readers are checking a brand they already use, and more are comparing options before they buy. These subgroups are smaller (Jan–Apr n=207, May–Oct n=153), so treat them as direction rather than precise figures.
3. Interest follows the news coverage, not the court filings
Our brand poll shows which brands readers are checking each month. Orgain has led every month, but its share moved with the headlines:
July is when the Costco suit was filed and picked up by national outlets, and the Amazon suit followed at month's end. Orgain's share more than doubled, then fell back to its spring level within two months.
Compare Jocko Fuel. Two lawsuits were filed against it in January and February 2026, yet Jocko never reached even 1.5% of respondents in any month through September. Lawsuits that stay in legal trade press barely register with consumers; suits that reach mainstream news briefly do. That's worth remembering when brands argue litigation alone is driving consumer concern.
The full brand ranking is in our Protein Brand Safety Search Index, updated today with data through October 13.
What Hasn't Changed
- Protein powder is still a dietary supplement. The FDA doesn't review or routinely test it before it's sold, and manufacturers aren't required to publish heavy-metal results.
- "Organic" still says nothing about metals. USDA Organic covers farming practices. Plant proteins draw lead and cadmium from soil whether or not they're organic.
- Third-party certification is still the best signal on the label. NSF Certified for Sport, Informed Sport and Clean Label Project certification all include heavy-metal testing. That was the practical advice a year ago, and with no testing law in place, it still is.
If You're Choosing a Protein Today
Based on Consumer Reports' October 2025 and January 2026 rounds, these are the lower-lead options we point readers to most often:
Optimum Nutrition Gold Standard 100% Whey — 56% of CR's level of concern, cleared for daily use, about $0.75 per serving.
Check on Amazon · Our testing write-up
Dymatize Super Mass Gainer — 25% of CR's level of concern; NSF Certified for Sport. It's a mass gainer, at about 1,280 calories per serving.
Check on Amazon · Our safety analysis
OWYN Pro Elite (plant-based) — the only plant protein Consumer Reports cleared for daily use, at 88% of its level of concern; NSF Certified for Sport.
Check on Amazon · Our OWYN analysis
Where does your brand rank?
All 28 brands Consumer Reports tested, ranked by lead per serving.
See all 28 brands ranked →Methodology & Limits
- Who answered: visitors to CleanProteinList.com, who mostly arrive from searches about lead and brand safety. They are far more safety-minded than protein buyers overall. Read the figures as trends within that group, not national estimates.
- No pre-report baseline: the quiz began January 23, 2026 and the brand poll question was added January 21, 2026, both three months after the report. We can show change over 2026, not a before-and-after comparison around October 2025.
- Deduplication: repeat submissions of the same answer within six minutes are counted once (quiz: 380 raw, 360 deduplicated). Poll brand names are normalized for spelling and product-line variants.
- Sample sizes: quiz awareness, n=188 (Jan–Apr) and n=136 (May–Oct 12); poll monthly n from 155 to 553. Site traffic fell in late summer, so recent months carry smaller samples. No data was collected September 14–16, when the site was briefly unreachable.
- No incentives were offered, and no brand has paid to appear in or influence any of this data.
FAQ
Q: Did California pass the protein testing law?
A: No. SB 1033 passed two Senate committees but was held in the Appropriations Committee on May 14, 2026 and did not advance this session. It would have taken effect January 1, 2028.
Q: How many lawsuits followed the Consumer Reports report?
A: We count at least seven proposed class actions between October 2025 and July 2026, against Naked Nutrition, Garden of Life, Jocko Fuel (twice), Quest Nutrition, Costco and Amazon. None had been decided or settled as of October 14, 2026.
Q: Has any of these protein powders been recalled?
A: No. The lawsuits are civil claims about labeling and disclosure, not FDA recalls, and the allegations are unproven.
Q: Is whey still safer than plant protein for lead?
A: On Consumer Reports' data, yes: plant proteins averaged about nine times more lead than whey. Certified plant options exist, but there are fewer of them. See our lead-free rankings.
The Bottom Line
A year after Consumer Reports' report, accountability for lead in protein powder is coming through the courts, not the legislature. Seven class actions are pending, California's testing bill stalled, and nothing requires brands to test or disclose. Readers aren't waiting: among people researching this topic, awareness of the testing nearly doubled, and more of them are comparing options before they buy. Until disclosure is required, third-party certification remains the most useful thing to look for on the label.
Sources:
- Consumer Reports protein powder and shake testing, October 14, 2025 and January 2026.
- Food Safety Magazine, "Senate Bill Would Require Heavy Metals Testing, Disclosures for Protein Powders," 2026 (SB 1033 provisions and January 1, 2028 start date).
- Office of Sen. Steve Padilla, SB 1033 introduction and committee releases, February–April 2026.
- CalMatters Digital Democracy, SB 1033 (2025–26) bill status: "May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission."
- Law360, "Naked Whey Sued Over Reports Of Lead In Protein Powder," October 2025; Top Class Actions, Naked Nutrition class action coverage.
- Top Class Actions, Garden of Life lead class action coverage (DeHerrera v. Garden of Life LLC, No. 5:25-cv-03118, C.D. Cal.).
- Law360, "Jocko Fuel Sued In NY Over Cadmium In Protein Shakes," January 2026 (Clemente v. Jocko Fuel, LLC, No. 1:26-cv-00659, S.D.N.Y.).
- ClassAction.org, complaint in Mcnatt v. Jocko Fuel, LLC, No. 3:26-cv-00791 (S.D. Cal.), filed February 9, 2026.
- California Attorney General Prop 65 records: Barrales v. Quest Nutrition, LLC, No. 26STCV07966 (L.A. Super. Ct.), filed March 11, 2026.
- Hagens Berman press releases on the Costco (July 7, 2026) and Amazon (July 31, 2026) Orgain suits; Top Class Actions on Costco's motion to dismiss, October 2026.
- CleanProteinList.com safety quiz and brand poll data, January 21 – October 13, 2026.
Last Updated: October 14, 2026
Legal Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal or medical advice. We are not involved in any of the lawsuits described and cannot provide information about joining them. All allegations described are unproven.
Affiliate Disclosure: This article contains affiliate links to Amazon. When you purchase through our links, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. We only recommend products with verified safety testing or independent certification. Learn more.