Study: 8% of Gluten-Free Products Test Over 20ppm, and 15% of "Gluten-Free" Products Certified by GFCO Contain Gluten at Over 10ppm

[Scott Adams]

The results of a recent study indicate that not all products labelled gluten-free are safe, and perhaps the biggest surprise were the issues with products that were GFCO certified.

 

[trents]

Wow! Thanks for this, Scott! We use those Banza chickpea noodles a lot. So much so, I've been complaining to my wife that I'm getting tired of them. Now there is a better reason to avoid them.

But this article is extremely revealing. Glyphosate has gotten a bum rap for years and really it is the misuse of it as a drying agent to accelerate harvest time that is the real problem. Food companies need to put their feet down and only buy agricultural products from producers who do no use glyphosate in this way. And consumers must hold their feet to the fire for this to happen and there also needs to be some government regulation enacted to outlaw this practice.

But the other shocking thing from this article is the deception in advertising or laxness in testing or both of companies producing gluten-free products. What can we do to stop this. Is a class action suit in order here?

There is another layer to this and that is it would seem to me that the GFCO folks need to be brought to task. We've got to do something here as a community. We need to stand together. Our health is at stake. Who knows how many celiacs are failing to experience healing because they are using these products that contain high levels of gut damaging agrichemicals and/or exceed standards for gluten-free status.

Scott, can you reference a source that glyphosate contributes to gluten intolerance. This is new information to me.

[Scott Adams]

I think you might mean this article:

and it looks like there is already one lawsuit, an older one, regarding glyphosate level in gluten-free foods, but these findings could certainly lead to more, especially considering "The highest level of glyphosate - 2,963 ppb found in Banza Chickpea Pasta - is the highest amount ever measured in human food by the lab." 

Regarding the GFCO, we will see how they react to this, but it certainly does not look good when 10% of their certified gluten-free products tested over 10ppm, and some over 20ppm. I wonder if there is a common thread here among the products that tested over...perhaps they are made in a shared facility? I'm not sure, but more research needs to be done, and we'll be doing follow up articles on this. We've already reached out to some of the companies mentioned in our article.

[trents]

The sad thing about all this is that it severely erodes the trust that those in the gluten intolerant/gluten sensitive community have in food companies and in gluten free/GFCO labeled products in general. How much do these labels really mean? Makes me think I might have been a little judgmental toward my "super sensitive" fellow celiacs. It may not be all in their heads after all.

[Scott Adams]

Good questions, and we're trying to find out more about what lab did the testing for the study, and we've also reached out to the GFCO for comment.

[trents]

Please get back to us. I hope every organization advocating for celiacs is made aware of this study and starts putting pressure on these entities for some answers and some change.

[Scott Adams]

I contacted Moms Across America and found out that the lab used in this study was Health Research Institute Labs - https://hrilabs.org, and they used the Romer Agrastrip Gluten G12 test, which is highly accurate at detecting the 33-mer peptide of gliadin down to 4ppm. The scientists at HRI carried out the tests in duplicate to ensure accuracy and reproducibility of the results, so I trust that their results are accurate. 

I have also reached out to each company in the study for comment that had too high gluten measurements per the FDA or GFCO, and so far none have replied.

This will be covered in a future article.

[trents]

Scott, I imagine the companies in question will not be forthcoming with responses to inquiries about this matter because some of them are in the process of litigation already and others fear it might be coming. They don't want to say anything they might regret that could become a part of public record. But I want to thank you for acting on behalf of our community. Even if nothing official comes of all this, maybe it will scare them enough to step up their testing protocols. 

[Scott Adams]

Made Good Foods just replied with a standard CYA we're looking into it...but more will be included in future articles.

[Scott Adams]

I am sharing Made Good Foods' formal reply, which was the 2nd response from them regarding the study:

Quote

Thank you for your note earlier this week. We wanted to keep you updated about the outcome of our urgent investigation into our Soft Baked Double Chocolate Cookies that were identified in the Moms Across America report.

We have received independent lab reports from Romer Labs stating that we are below 5 parts per million of gluten – accurately in line with our gluten free product claims and in full compliance with the GFCO gluten guidelines. Using the US-RIDASCREEN Gliadin Test methodology, all 6 sample results from the Lot ID 1023 came back within specs <LOQ ppm 5.0, reiterating the gluten-free status of our products. Additionally, the oats used in this specific Lot ID 1023 were tested by our suppliers and resulted in reporting less than 5 ppm of gluten.

We are committed to ongoing quality control, and we consistently test to assure that levels of gluten are below 10 ppm. As such, we are perplexed with the lab results of the article and will inquire further to ensure we fully understand the discrepancy. 

Our results underscore our commitment to maintaining the highest standards of quality and safety in all aspects of our operations in our dedicated gluten-free facilities. It also reaffirms our dedication to meeting the needs and expectations of our consumers, including those with dietary restrictions or preferences.

If you have any questions or require further information regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to reach out.

Salma Fotovat (She/Her)
Director of Sourcing & Procurement

 

[trents]

Scott, what do you make of that? Different results because of different testing methods used?

[Scott Adams]

I need to find out whether the batch they tested here is the same as the batch from the study--I'm not sure about that. If it is the same batch then it's possible there could be hot spots within the batch--areas with more contamination, and it that is the case Health Research Institute Labs tested part of the batch that had more contamination, while the sample(s) tested by Romer Labs was below 5ppm.

[RMJ]

On 6/18/2024 at 11:09 AM, Scott Adams said:

I need to find out whether the batch they tested here is the same as the batch from the study--I'm not sure about that. If it is the same batch then it's possible there could be hot spots within the batch--areas with more contamination, and it that is the case Health Research Institute Labs tested part of the batch that had more contamination, while the sample(s) tested by Romer Labs was below 5ppm.

Here’s one problem.  The article on the MMA website says the Made Good cookies are Soft Baked Double Chocolate, as does your reply from Made Good. The Certificate of Analysis from Health Research Institute has the same lot number (1023) as your reply from Made Good, but says they are vanilla cookies. So what was really tested?  What is the error?  What other errors might there be? My background includes Quality Assurance and something is wrong here.

Health Research Institute certificate of analysis linked from Moms Across America article

Moms Across America article

[Patty harrigan]

Terrifying. I rely on the certification when I purchase products. 

[Scott Adams]

On 6/18/2024 at 12:37 PM, RMJ said:

Here’s one problem.  The article on the MMA website says the Made Good cookies are Soft Baked Double Chocolate, as does your reply from Made Good. The Certificate of Analysis from Health Research Institute has the same lot number (1023) as your reply from Made Good, but says they are vanilla cookies. So what was really tested?  What is the error?  What other errors might there be? My background includes Quality Assurance and something is wrong here.

Health Research Institute certificate of analysis linked from Moms Across America article

Moms Across America article

Good question, as the original article said Made Good Vanilla Cookies. but was later changed to Made Good Foods Double Chocolate Cookies (I updated our article to reflect this). This is clearly another possibility, that the study somehow mixed up the item that tested positive. I have reached out to Moms Across America to clarify this issue.

[Scott Adams]

We've put the Made Good Foods Vanilla Cookies back into our article based on the lab results, and we also added this huge missed item that was not covered in Mom's Across America's original article:

• Trader Joe's Everything Bagel registered 269.8 ppm gluten, over ten times the level deemed safe by the FDA.

I eat these bagels regularly!! We've reached out to Trader Joe's for comment.

[RMJ]

Thank you Scott for following up with the various organizations/companies!

[Scott Adams]

Moms Across America responded to me and is certain that the product tested was Made Good Foods Soft Baked Double Chocolate Cookies, so we did not reverse our initial correction to our article.

It seems that the only reasonable explanation as to why both labs conflict would be the hot spot theory, although Made Good Foods does not agree:

Quote

We appreciate you reaching out for further clarity. We have tested multiple samples from the same lot reported by Moms Across America, Lot ID 1023. All tested samples reported less than 5 parts per million (ppm) of gluten. Additionally, we received independent lab results from our raw material suppliers, reporting less than 5ppm of gluten.

We are committed to maintaining the highest standards of quality and safety in all aspects of our operations and maintain these same high standards for our suppliers as well. Both ourselves and our suppliers have followed the Purity Protocol for producing gluten-free oats and have been proudly GFCO certified for many years.

Our Soft Baked Double Chocolate Cookies are made with oat flour, which is produced through the process of milling oat flakes. Given this production process, any potential hot spots of gluten would test across the full batch. This production process, in combination with our independent lab results through Romer Labs, as well as those of our suppliers, make the risk of such a hot spot very unlikely.

Again, we thank you for the opportunity to speak with you about our products and dedication to meeting consumers’ needs and expectations. Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any further questions regarding this matter.

Salma Fotovat (She/Her)
Director of Sourcing & Procurement

 

[RMJ]

There’s still the question of why Health Research Institute called the cookies vanilla on their certificate of analysis.

Edited June 18 by RMJ
Correction

[Scott Adams]

For reference here is are the gluten results from the Moms Across America study, carried out by Health Research Institute:

https://www.celiac.com/images/Certificate_of_Analysis.pdf

 

[Scott Adams]

I am sharing this response from Karl Rickett, who handles press relations on behalf of Banza

Quote

Thanks for sharing that. I wanted to make sure you had the below facts for any future coverage since this is important context for readers to understand:

• The EPA’s limit for glyphosate in chickpea products is 8,000 parts per billion. Additionally, the MAA blog states the EU’s limit is 10 ppb when in fact the EU's limit is actually 10,000 ppb for chickpeas. The Banza product tested by MAA is well below both of those limits and is safe.
• The EPA and FDA have determined dietary exposure to glyphosate at these limits is safe for both adults and children
• There is also no connection between the use of glyphosate and celiac disease, as reported by Beyond Celiac and the Celiac Disease Foundation.
• There have been numerous scientific studies and government agencies that have proven that these trace amounts of glyphosate are completely safe.
  • The EPA, FDA, and larger scientific community have determined dietary exposure to glyphosate at these limits is safe and inconsequential for both adults and children. (EPA)
  • The European Food Safety Authority found no “areas of concern” for human, animal and environmental health from the use of glyphosate
  • The European Commission recently renewed their approval of glyphosate for another 10 years
  • The National Cancer Institute published a study that found no evidence linking glyphosate with cancer.

 

[Scott Adams]

Although this is a topic that may be better suited for a different venue, I just want to respond to Banza's official response above.

Unfortunately government agencies are often wrong in their assessments of such things like long-term risks associated with pesticides and herbicides, and they are often pushed by industry to allow their use without enough long-term scientific evidence that is necessary to gage their safety to humans, animals, insects, water, the environment, etc. Examples of many USA government regulatory failures are below, and each of these pesticides/herbicides were widely supported by scientists, farmers, politicians, etc., as safe, and many were used for decades before their dangers were discovered:

Pesticides and Herbicides Once Deemed Safe and Later Banned in the USA

• DDT (Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane)
  • Time Period: 1940s - 1972
  • Reason for Ban: Found to cause cancer and severe environmental harm, particularly to birds, leading to thinning eggshells.
• Chlordane
  • Time Period: 1948 - 1988
  • Reason for Ban: Linked to cancer, liver damage, and environmental persistence leading to long-term soil contamination.
• Heptachlor
  • Time Period: 1950s - 1988
  • Reason for Ban: Associated with cancer, neurological damage, and persistent environmental contamination.
• Aldrin and Dieldrin
  • Time Period: 1950s - 1987
  • Reason for Ban: Found to be highly toxic to humans and wildlife, causing cancer and adverse effects on the nervous system.
• Endrin
  • Time Period: 1950s - 1980
  • Reason for Ban: Extremely toxic to fish and wildlife, causing significant environmental damage and posing risks to human health.
• Toxaphene
  • Time Period: 1940s - 1982
  • Reason for Ban: Linked to cancer, liver damage, and persistent environmental contamination harmful to aquatic life.
• Mirex
  • Time Period: 1950s - 1978
  • Reason for Ban: Persistent environmental contaminant causing cancer and reproductive harm to animals.
• 2,4,5-T (Trichlorophenoxyacetic Acid)
  • Time Period: 1940s - 1985
  • Reason for Ban: Contaminated with dioxin, a highly toxic compound causing cancer and other severe health issues.
• Ethylene Dibromide (EDB)
  • Time Period: 1940s - 1983
  • Reason for Ban: Found to be a potent carcinogen and groundwater contaminant.
• Pentachlorophenol (PCP)
  • Time Period: 1930s - 1987 (restricted use)
  • Reason for Ban: Linked to cancer, liver damage, and environmental contamination affecting wildlife.

There is growing evidence suggesting that glyphosate may harm bees, though the extent and mechanisms of this harm are still being studied. Research has indicated that glyphosate can disrupt the gut microbiome of bees. The gut microbiome is crucial for bee health, aiding in digestion and protecting against pathogens. When glyphosate interferes with these beneficial bacteria, it can make bees more susceptible to diseases and reduce their overall health. Some studies have suggested that glyphosate may affect the cognitive functions of bees, impairing their ability to navigate and forage. This could lead to decreased efficiency in finding food and returning to the hive, ultimately affecting the colony's survival. There is also concern that glyphosate may affect the development of bee larvae. Exposure to glyphosate during critical stages of development could potentially lead to developmental abnormalities or higher mortality rates.

Glyphosate could potentially meet the same fate as other banned pesticides and herbicides if future studies conclusively demonstrate significant health or environmental risks. The ongoing debates and lawsuits regarding its safety, coupled with the actions of some countries to ban or restrict its use, indicate that it is under significant scrutiny. Regulatory bodies like the EPA and the European Commission regularly review scientific data to assess the safety of such chemicals. If new evidence emerges linking glyphosate to severe health issues or environmental harm, it could lead to stricter regulations or bans.

Glyphosate can contaminate water supplies. Studies have shown that it can be detected in surface water, groundwater, and even drinking water, though typically at low concentrations. Its presence in water is primarily due to agricultural runoff and improper application practices. While the concentrations found in water supplies are generally below the safety limits set by regulatory agencies, the potential for contamination and the persistence of glyphosate and its degradation product, AMPA, in the environment remain concerns for both public health and ecosystems.

[Scott Adams]

I am sharing Jovial Foods' response to our inquiry about the Moms Across America study:

Quote

We were shocked to read the article on Celiac.com this morning and wanted to reach out personally as we have worked together in the past. We take these assertions very seriously and have done a thorough investigation.

Jovial President, Frank Bergin wanted to share the following information with you.

Jovial has tested packages of product retained from the same production lot in question. In multiple analyses at an independent third-party ISO 17025 certified lab:

• No gluten was detected above the lower limit of quantifiable detection of 5ppm.
• No pesticides were detected above the lower limit of quantifiable detection.
• No glyphosate was detected above the lower limit of quantifiable detection.

These recent additional tests match the testing that was done when the product was produced last year.

Jovial takes pride in producing all of its gluten free pasta in a dedicated gluten-free facility. We test all of our organic brown rice flour – the only ingredient besides water in the product – for the presence of gluten and pesticides, among other compounds, and reject any batches that do not pass those screening tests. And Jovial works with multiple third-party certifying organizations including GFCO, Project Detox, OK Kosher, and QAI to independently verify that our products are meeting or exceeding the stringently high standards of each one of those groups.

We were founded and continue to be owned and guided by a gluten-sensitive family who strive to produce the cleanest, safest products possible. We stand behind our products and the claims we make about them.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

Thank you,

Heidi
Senior Marketing Manager
Jovial Foods, Inc.

 

[RMJ]

I like Jovial’s answer, that they didn’t detect gluten/pesticides above the lower limit of quantifiable detection, more than Banza’s answer that what they detected was less than the allowable limit.

Limit of quantification is a very standard concept in analytical laboratories.

 

[RMJ]

GIG posted the following on Facebook this morning - I hope it’s ok to copy and paste it here:

“We have recently been made aware of concerns raised by Moms Across America (MAA) regarding the gluten content in several products certified gluten-free by our organization. Specifically, their report mentioned that three products contained gluten levels above the FDA allowable limit of 20 parts per million (ppm) and three additional products had levels above our stricter limit of 10 ppm.

Upon seeing this report, we promptly conducted a thorough investigation in partnership with the GFCO manufacturers who were named by Moms Across America, including a thorough evaluation of each clients' compliance records, as well as retesting the specific lots mentioned in the Moms Across America report. We asked the manufacturers to run multiple tests on their retained samples from the lots named in the MAA report, in order to help rule out the possibility of hot spots. All testing was performed at ISO 17025 accredited laboratories that have GFCO-approved test methods on their scope of accreditation.

So far, our testing has confirmed that four of the products, from the same lots, are indeed gluten-free and meet our certification standards.

Here are the results of our tests:

MadeGood Soft Baked Double Chocolate Cookies Lot 1023 (erroneously labeled as “vanilla” in the MAA report): Six separate results of Less than 5 ppm of gluten

Jovial Spaghetti Lot 3291: Six separate results of Less than 5 ppm of gluten

Simple Mills Brownie Mix – Six separate results of Less than 5 ppm of gluten

Simple Mills Almond Flour Crackers – Six separate results of Less than 5 ppm of glute

** Reporting on one additional product is still pending.

We take these findings seriously and want to assure our consumers that we adhere to management system controls to reduce possible risks, as well as stringent testing protocols to verify the gluten-free status of certified products. Our testing requirements are robust and designed to ensure that all products meet our high standards for gluten-free certification.

We understand the concerns this report may have caused and appreciate your trust in our certification. We will update the community when the remaining results are available.”