Texas AG targets oats over glyphosate

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said on June 2 that his office had launched what it called a sweeping investigation into glyphosate residue in food, naming Bayer and PepsiCo among the companies that received Civil Investigative Demands. The announcement tied the probe to oat-based foods and to products marketed as “healthy,” with Paxton’s office saying some manufacturers knew their products contained high levels of glyphosate. (ebs.publicnow.com) Paxton’s office said oats are a particular focus because they are used in cereals, breakfast bars and cookies, products it said are widely consumed by children. The release did not identify specific oat products or disclose test results for individual brands. ### What exactly did Paxton announce on June 2? Paxton’s office said on June 2 that it had issued Civil Investigative Demands, or CIDs, to “major pesticide and food manufacturers,” including Bayer and PepsiCo, as part of an investigation into glyphosate contamination in food. The release said the office was examining whether products sold as “healthy” were being marketed deceptively despite glyphosate residue. The Texas attorney general’s statement framed the action as consumer-protection enforcement, not a product recall or a lawsuit filed in court. A CID is a pre-suit investigative demand used to obtain documents and information. Paxton’s office did not say when responses are due. (ebs.publicnow.com) ### Why are oats at the center of this case? Paxton’s office said “over 90%” of glyphosate found in food comes from desiccation, the practice of applying herbicides shortly before harvest so crops dry uniformly, and said oat-containing foods are a major concern. The release said oats are common in cereals, breakfast bars and cookies and described children as especially vulnerable because of how often those foods are consumed. (ebs.publicnow.com) The federal record shows oats have long been a flashpoint in glyphosate disputes. A 2019 Federal Register notice on a petition to EPA said petitioners had asked the agency to reduce the glyphosate tolerance for oats from 30 parts per million to 0.1 ppm and to require labels to explicitly prohibit preharvest use on oats. (ebs.publicnow.com) ### Which companies are named, and why does PepsiCo matter here? Bayer was named because glyphosate is the main ingredient in Roundup, the herbicide at the center of the investigation described by Paxton’s office. PepsiCo was named because it owns Quaker, one of the best-known oat brands in the United States. (ebs.publicnow.com) PepsiCo’s Quaker brand says it sells oats, cereals and snacks, including granola bars and related oat-based products. Paxton’s office did not accuse Quaker by name in the release, and it did not list any specific PepsiCo or Quaker products in the June 2 announcement. The office also did not publish laboratory data alongside the statement. (federalregister.gov) ### Is this about glyphosate itself, or about the word “healthy”? The June 2 release links both issues. Paxton’s office said it is investigating glyphosate residue in food and separately said some products were marketed as “healthy” even though manufacturers allegedly knew they contained “dangerously high levels” of glyphosate. (ebs.publicnow.com) EPA says glyphosate is a widely used herbicide that has been registered in the United States since 1974 and that the agency regulates pesticide residues on food through tolerances. That means the Texas inquiry appears aimed at state consumer-protection and labeling issues as well as the broader debate over federal residue limits. (ebs.publicnow.com) ### What is known about the evidence so far? Paxton’s office cited research and prior findings about glyphosate exposure, including a claim that more than 70% of American adults have detectable traces of glyphosate in their bodies. The release also cited the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s 2015 classification of glyphosate as a “probable human carcinogen.” (ebs.publicnow.com) The announcement did not include the names of laboratories, the dates of testing, or product-by-product contamination figures. Until the state releases those materials or files a case, the public record consists mainly of the attorney general’s statement and the companies named in it. (epa.gov) ### What happens next? The immediate next step is the CID process. Bayer and PepsiCo, the two companies named in Paxton’s June 2 release, can be expected to receive or respond to requests for records tied to glyphosate use, sourcing, testing, and marketing claims. (ebs.publicnow.com) Texas has used similar food-label investigations before. For now, the June 2 action leaves open whether Paxton’s office will seek settlements, demand label changes, or file enforcement claims after reviewing the companies’ responses. (haynesboone.com) (ebs.publicnow.com)