Costco Hit With Class-Action Lawsuit Over Heavy Metals in Orgain Protein Powder
Every morning across America, millions of men tear open a bag of protein powder, scoop it into a blender, and knock back what they believe is a clean, high-quality supplement designed to support their training and health. For anyone who has been buying Orgain Organic Protein Powder at Costco, that assumption is now the subject of a federal lawsuit — one that raises deeply uncomfortable questions about what is actually inside those containers, and who is responsible for making sure consumers know the truth.
A class-action lawsuit filed July 7 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington accuses Costco Wholesale Corporation of selling a popular protein powder contaminated with dangerous levels of lead, cadmium, and arsenic — while marketing the product as "good, clean nutrition." The lawsuit was filed by Seattle-based law firm Hagens Berman on behalf of seven plaintiffs from Washington, California, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, and Texas. It is one of the most pointed legal challenges yet in an increasingly contentious national conversation about what goes into the supplements that health-focused consumers trust most.
What the Lawsuit Actually Alleges
Costco Wholesale Corp. is being sued over its sales of Orgain Organic Protein Powder, in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Washington. The suit, which names several plaintiffs, claims Costco violated consumer protection and false advertising laws by failing to warn customers that the protein powder contains lead, cadmium, and arsenic.
It claims Costco sold Orgain Organic Protein Powder — in Vanilla Bean and Creamy Chocolate Fudge flavors — without disclosing the presence of toxic heavy metals. The legal theory rests on the idea that Costco, as the retailer controlling the point of sale and the product's marketing messaging, bears a duty to its customers that goes beyond simply stocking the shelves. Plaintiffs allege that Costco controlled the product listings, packaging messaging, and point-of-sale for Orgain protein powder, prominently touting phrases such as "the power of clean," "quality ingredients, higher standards," and "relentless about quality."
According to the 87-page complaint, consumers could not reasonably determine whether the protein powder contained heavy metals because doing so requires specialized laboratory testing. "Reasonable consumers ... could not learn of the inclusion of heavy metals in the contaminated products unless Costco included a proper disclosure because identifying the presence of heavy metals requires expensive and sophisticated laboratory testing," the lawsuit reads. The suit adds, "But Costco failed to perform or require any heavy metal testing, or to disclose the presence of heavy metals."
Seven of the plaintiffs allege they purchased the product believing it was a healthy, high-quality supplement based on its labeling and marketing. The seven named plaintiffs span multiple states and purchased the products at various Costco locations between 2019 and 2026. That's a seven-year window during which, if the allegations hold up in court, unknowing consumers were repeatedly exposing themselves to toxic metals they had no way of detecting.
The Numbers Behind the Claims
The lawsuit doesn't traffic in vague fears — it leans on specific laboratory data that makes for sobering reading. According to the lawsuit, independent laboratory testing conducted by plaintiff Randall Hartwright of Texas and the plaintiffs' legal team found detectable levels of lead, cadmium, and arsenic across multiple product lots and flavors.
The complaint cites specific concentrations from the testing: lead levels of up to 67 parts per billion (ppb), cadmium levels of up to 70.3 ppb, and arsenic levels of up to 19.8 ppb. The lead figure is particularly striking in context. The lawsuit cites Consumer Reports testing conducted in October 2025 on Orgain's Vanilla Bean Protein Powder. According to the complaint, Consumer Reports found that the product contained lead at 143 percent of its benchmark level, meaning the amount detected was approximately 43 percent higher than the organization's recommended threshold for concern.
According to the complaint, independent testing commissioned by the plaintiffs found that Orgain's Vanilla Bean flavor contained lead levels exceeding California's Proposition 65 limits by more than 600%. That's not a marginal overage — it's a figure that demands attention from anyone who stacks cases of this product in their pantry after a Costco run.
Consumer Reports' benchmark for lead exposure in food is 0.5 micrograms per day. While that threshold is more conservative than what the FDA uses as its own reference point, the scale of the alleged exceedances goes well beyond a matter of differing methodologies. According to the Food and Drug Administration, there is no known safe level of lead exposure. Studies suggest that the metal can accumulate in the body faster than it can be eliminated, meaning repeated exposure may increase health risks.
Orgain Pushes Back
The brand at the center of the controversy — Orgain — has not sat quietly. Orgain pushed back on the allegations, saying its products are safe to consume. "Orgain products are safe to consume," the company said in a July 9 statement provided to USA Today. The company added that "while trace amounts of substances that occur in the environment can be present in plant-based ingredients, our products comply with applicable food safety standards and guidelines."
Costco has not publicly responded to the lawsuit. The retailer's protein powder listings include a disclaimer stating, "Product details have been supplied by the manufacturer and are hosted by a third party." That disclaimer may become legally significant as the case progresses — it could be read as an attempt to distance the warehouse giant from the product's marketing claims, or it could be seen as insufficient when placed against the specific in-store and online messaging the plaintiffs say Costco itself controlled.
What the Plaintiffs Want
The proposed class-action seeks to represent consumers in Washington, California, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio, and Texas. The remedies being sought are both financial and structural. The plaintiffs are asking the court to require Costco to disclose the presence and levels of heavy metals in the protein powder and to stop selling the product until those disclosures are made. The plaintiffs are also asking for a jury trial in the case.
The law firm leading the charge has a pointed message for consumers. "Many consumers who buy and use protein powder do so routinely as part of a continuing focus on their fitness and health," said Steve Berman, managing partner and co-founder of Hagens Berman, which represents the plaintiffs. "These same health-conscious consumers have unknowingly ingested alarming levels of toxic heavy metals — lead, cadmium and arsenic — again and again, trusting that Costco's quality assurance would not allow something like this to happen."
The pricing angle the lawsuit raises is also worth examining. The suit notes that many competitor products retail at lower price points. Orgain Organic Protein Powder in Vanilla Bean was priced at approximately $0.79 per ounce, while some competitor products with no detectable heavy metals were priced as low as $0.42 per ounce, according to the complaint. In other words, the plaintiffs argue consumers paid a premium precisely because of the product's "clean" and "organic" positioning — a positioning they allege was false.
A Systemic Problem, Not Just One Product
The Costco lawsuit doesn't exist in a vacuum. It lands on the heels of a wave of independent research that has been building a damning picture of the protein powder industry as a whole — one that will unsettle anyone who thought "organic" was a guarantee of purity.
The Clean Label Project Report
In January 2025, the Clean Label Project published a report testing 160 top-selling protein powders and found that 79% of organic protein powders exceeded California's Proposition 65 limits for lead — with 41% testing more than two times over that limit. The irony is stark: the very products positioned as cleaner and more natural were, statistically, the most contaminated.
That counter-intuitive finding has a scientific explanation. While organic protein powders may have fewer pesticide residues, they can still contain heavy metals from soil contamination. Plants absorb whatever is in the ground they grow in. Organic farming bans synthetic pesticides and herbicides, but it doesn't purify the soil of naturally occurring or historically deposited heavy metals. Lead and other heavy metals occur naturally in soil and water, so achieving zero-level exposure would be impossible. The question the lawsuit presses, then, is not whether any trace contamination exists but whether the levels found cross a line — and whether consumers had any right to know.
The Consumer Reports Investigation
In October 2025, Consumer Reports published a separate investigation finding that more than two-thirds of 23 protein products it tested exceeded its level of concern for lead. The report found that plant-based protein powders had lead levels nine times higher on average than dairy-based alternatives. That nine-times disparity is a number that should reframe how plant-protein enthusiasts think about their supplement choices.
Consumer Reports found that over two-thirds of 23 popular protein powders and shakes had unsafe levels of lead, cadmium, or arsenic. Three products also exceeded Consumer Reports' level of concern for cadmium and inorganic arsenic, toxic heavy metals that have been classified as a probable human carcinogen and known human carcinogen, respectively, by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Consumer Reports specifically identified Orgain Organic Plant-Based Protein Powder in Vanilla Bean as a product it rated "Okay to eat occasionally," with lead levels at 143% of its level of concern and a suggested limit of 4¾ servings per week. For the guy mixing two scoops into his daily post-workout shake, "occasionally" is a meaningful constraint that nowhere appeared on Orgain's product label.
Why This Is So Hard to Regulate
A crucial piece of context that often gets buried in stories like this one is the fundamental gap in how dietary supplements are overseen in the United States — a gap that the Costco lawsuit explicitly highlights. The lawsuit points to what the plaintiffs describe as a regulatory gap. Unlike prescription drugs, protein powder supplements are not reviewed, approved, or routinely tested by the Food and Drug Administration before they are sold, making consumers more reliant on manufacturers' and retailers' representations about product quality and safety.
The U.S. FDA does not pre-approve or test supplements before sale, and there are no enforceable federal limits on heavy metals in protein powders. Instead, it's up to manufacturers to ensure the safety of products and accuracy of labeling — this includes testing for contaminants, such as lead. In practice, that self-regulatory framework means consumers are essentially trusting that manufacturers are doing their homework — and as the wave of recent testing shows, that trust may be misplaced in a significant number of cases.
Although the U.S. FDA regulates dietary supplement ingredients in the finished products, the scope of this regulation is limited to restricting the marketing of adulterated or misbranded products. The agency is reactive, not proactive. It can step in after a problem surfaces, but it doesn't screen supplements before they hit the shelf. A FDA spokesperson has said, "We will review the findings from Consumer Reports' testing along with other data we have collected to better inform where to focus our testing efforts and enforcement activities." That statement may be appropriate bureaucratic caution, but it offers little comfort to the guy who has been scooping Orgain into his morning shake for the past three years.
The Health Consequences of Long-Term Exposure
Understanding what's actually at stake requires looking honestly at what lead, cadmium, and arsenic do to the human body over time. These are not contaminants with ambiguous health profiles — decades of toxicological research has mapped the damage they cause with considerable precision.
Lead
Chronic lead exposure has been linked to immune suppression, reproductive problems, kidney damage, and high blood pressure in adults. Since lead lingers in the body, even small amounts can add up over time and contribute to health risks. Lead can impair brain function, lower energy levels, and affect heart health, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency. For men who are supplementing because they want to perform better — physically and mentally — the possibility that their protein powder is quietly undermining those same systems is a particularly grim irony.
No amount of lead exposure is considered safe, but the greatest danger comes from repeated or continuous exposure, particularly at high doses. The daily supplement habit that millions of men maintain in the name of health may, in some cases, be delivering a slow-accumulating dose of a metal the EPA classifies as having no safe threshold.
Cadmium and Arsenic
Cadmium and inorganic arsenic are toxic heavy metals that have been classified as a probable human carcinogen and known human carcinogen, respectively, by the Environmental Protection Agency. Three products in Consumer Reports' testing contained excess cadmium and inorganic arsenic. Cadmium is also notorious for accumulating in the kidneys, where long-term exposure is associated with renal dysfunction — an issue that would be particularly relevant for athletes and gym-goers who are already placing elevated demands on their bodies.
Regulators and Lawmakers Begin to Move
The legal and regulatory response to the growing body of evidence is starting to take shape, even if the pace remains frustratingly slow by the standards of the problem's scale.
In February 2026, California introduced Senate Bill 1033, which would require mandatory testing and public disclosure of heavy metals in protein products sold in the state. California has historically served as the de facto national standard-setter for consumer safety, given the size of its market, so the bill carries implications that extend beyond state lines. If it passes, manufacturers who want access to California's tens of millions of consumers will need to meet those disclosure requirements — effectively raising the floor for the entire industry.
On June 8, 2026, the Texas Attorney General launched an industry-wide investigation into protein powder manufacturers for potential violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act related to undisclosed heavy metal contamination. The AG's office noted that "Consumer Reports tested 23 products and found that lead levels in plant-based protein powders were, on average, nine times higher than those made with dairy proteins such as whey and twice as high as beef-based products." With California legislating and Texas investigating, the industry is facing pressure from two of its largest markets simultaneously.
What This Means for Supplement Shoppers Right Now
For Costco shoppers who have purchased the protein powder, the lawsuit doesn't automatically mean that the product is unsafe to consume. The allegations are currently unproven, and the case will need to move through the court system before any legal determination is made. That said, the underlying testing data — from Consumer Reports, from the Clean Label Project, and from the plaintiffs' own independent laboratory work — exists independently of the lawsuit's ultimate outcome and is worth taking seriously on its own merits.
The most actionable takeaway from the body of evidence now on the table may be the distinction between protein sources. The source of protein was key: Plant-derived protein products had nine times the lead found in dairy proteins like whey, and twice as much as beef-based protein. For men who are not categorically opposed to dairy, whey protein may represent a meaningfully safer bet based on current data. Organic protein powders were found to contain on average three times more lead and twice the amount of cadmium compared to non-organic products — a counterintuitive finding that should prompt serious reconsideration among buyers who equate "organic" with "safer."
Because protein powders are not subject to premarket FDA review, consumers often rely on third-party testing, retailer assurances, and manufacturer disclosures when evaluating product safety. The practical implication is that shoppers who want meaningful assurance should look for products that carry third-party certifications from organizations like NSF International or Informed Sport — bodies that actually test finished products for heavy metal contamination and other contaminants before slapping a seal on the label.
A Broader Reckoning for the Supplement Industry
The Costco lawsuit is likely to be a landmark moment in an industry-wide reckoning that has been building for years. Concerns have been raised about the presence of heavy metals in protein powder supplements following multiple Consumer Reports analyses. Consumer Reports found that the average amounts of heavy metals in three servings of protein powder per day exceeded the maximum limits in dietary supplements proposed by U.S. Pharmacopeia. Another study reported that 40% of the 133 protein powder products they tested had elevated levels of heavy metals. This is not a problem with one brand, one retailer, or one flavor. It's a structural issue baked into how plant-based supplements are sourced, manufactured, and — critically — not tested.
As the lawsuit proceeds, the central question will be whether Costco had a duty to disclose the alleged presence of heavy metals and whether consumers were misled by the product's marketing and labeling. That's a legal question, and it will be answered in a courtroom. But the parallel question — whether the supplement industry as a whole has been trading on "clean" and "organic" marketing language while failing to actually verify what's in its products — is already being answered by the testing data. The answer is not flattering.
For the millions of American men who treat their protein powder as a non-negotiable part of their daily nutrition stack, this is a moment that demands a harder look at the label, the brand, and the third-party verification — or lack thereof — behind every tub on the shelf. The fitness community has long operated on the assumption that more natural means more trustworthy. The evidence accumulating around plant-based protein powders suggests that assumption needs to be retired.
