Vital Proteins, a popular health and wellness brand specializing in collagen, protein powders, and supplements, is currently under legal scrutiny following allegations of containing toxic heavy metals like lead and cadmium in some of its products. These allegations have led to consumer complaints, regulatory notices, and potential class action lawsuits in 2025, raising significant concerns about product safety and marketing transparency.
Details of the Vital Proteins Lawsuit and Allegations
The lawsuit accuses Vital Proteins of selling supplements that exceed safe levels of heavy metals, particularly lead and cadmium, which are known to cause serious health risks such as cancer, birth defects, and reproductive harm. These claims stem from tests conducted by independent laboratories and advocacy groups, including California’s Proposition 65 warnings that require disclosure of exposure to harmful chemicals.
Specific products implicated include Vital Proteins Daily Greens and Plant Protein powders sold nationwide by retailers such as Target, Amazon, and TJX Companies. The notice of violation was issued in July 2025 by APS&EE, a California organization focused on reducing environmental toxic exposures.
Health Risks Associated with Lead and Cadmium
Lead and cadmium are heavy metals linked to adverse effects on human health, even at low exposures. Lead is associated with neurological damage, developmental delays in children, cardiovascular problems, and cancers. Cadmium poses risks to the kidneys, lungs, bones, and is also classified as a carcinogen.
Regulatory agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) monitor and regulate exposure limits to these metals in consumer products, particularly dietary supplements.
Vital Proteins’ Response and Actions
Vital Proteins has maintained that it complies with all safety standards and performs rigorous third-party testing to ensure product quality. The company highlights its commitment to transparency and consumer safety, emphasizing that they are actively investigating the claims and working with regulatory authorities.
The company urges consumers to continue using their products but advises reviewing any official recall or advisory notices.
Regulatory and Legal Developments
Recent legal developments include the issuance of California Proposition 65 notices to Vital Proteins and associated retailers regarding failure to warn consumers of potential heavy metal exposures. Consumer groups may pursue class actions alleging failure to disclose these risks and false advertising.
This dispute aligns with a broader trend of increased accountability for supplement manufacturers as consumer awareness and regulatory scrutiny over product contaminants grow.
Consumer Impact and Market Implications
The lawsuit and media coverage have prompted customer concerns and calls for better regulatory oversight of dietary supplements. Some consumers report discontinuing Vital Proteins products, while others seek assurances regarding safety testing and ingredient sourcing.
The case highlights the challenges facing the booming supplement market in balancing innovation, consumer demand, and rigorous safety standards.
Conclusion
The Vital Proteins lawsuit of 2025 underscores critical issues about supplement safety, regulatory compliance, and truthful marketing. As investigations and legal proceedings unfold, stakeholders await clarity on how heavy metal contamination risks will be addressed and mitigated.
For consumers, the case reinforces the importance of researching product sources, checking for third-party testing, and staying informed about regulatory developments in the wellness industry.
