Where can the full Florida ExposingFoodToxins candy list be accessed and what methodology was used to test products?
Executive summary
Florida’s full “Exposing Food Toxins” candy list and results are published on the state-run ExposingFoodToxins.com website, where the Healthy Florida First candy report and accompanying product pages appear [1] [2]. The Department of Health says it purchased 46 candy products from 10 brands and had them analyzed at a contracted certified laboratory using a standardized metals test (EPA Method 6010D) that measures total arsenic; the state then compared results to its own “screening benchmarks,” a choice that has drawn industry criticism [3] [4] [5].
1. Where the full Florida list is published and what it contains
Florida officials directed the public to the ExposingFoodToxins.com site for the complete candy testing results—individual product pages list detected contaminants and approximate “safe” annual consumption estimates based on developmental age, and the site hosts both the infant formula and candy reports produced under the Healthy Florida First initiative [1] [2] [6].
2. How products were collected and the scope of sampling
The Florida Department of Health reported that it collected 46 candy products representing ten companies, purchasing items online and in stores across the state as part of the Healthy Florida First testing assignment; the sample set included gummies and well-known branded confections such as Nerds and others mentioned in news coverage [3] [7] [8].
3. Which laboratory methods were used to measure arsenic and other metals
State officials say the candies were analyzed by a certified laboratory that conducts food, environmental and forensic testing and that the analyses used EPA Method 6010D to quantify total metals—an established, standardized technique that measures total arsenic but does not differentiate organic from inorganic arsenic species [3] [4] [9].
4. How Florida interpreted results: screening benchmarks and exposure estimates
Florida compared measured concentrations against its own health-based “screening benchmarks” and calculated estimated annual piece-counts that would meet those benchmarks for children and adults—these per-product exposure thresholds and the resulting “pieces per year” messaging are presented on the ExposingFoodToxins site [2] [9] [1].
5. Industry response and scientific context about methodology
The National Confectioners Association and other industry voices pushed back, saying Florida relied on screening benchmarks that “do not align with current federal regulatory standards or recognized peer-reviewed science” and arguing the report lacks transparency about data-driven thresholds and evaluation methods; the industry also noted federal initiatives such as the FDA’s “Closer to Zero” effort addressing naturally occurring elements like arsenic [5] [10] [11].
6. What the public report does and does not show—limitations to keep in mind
The published work offers raw results, per-product exposure estimates and a description of the lab method, but EPA 6010D’s measurement of total arsenic means the report does not, in the documentation cited by news outlets, distinguish inorganic arsenic (the more toxic form) from organic arsenic, and some local reporting and industry statements say the state’s benchmarks are not the same as FDA action levels—readers should therefore consult the ExposingFoodToxins pages for product-level data while noting those methodological caveats [4] [10] [2] [5].
7. Bottom line for readers seeking the original data and the scientific debate
The full list and product-level results are accessible now at ExposingFoodToxins.com/candy and on the broader ExposingFoodToxins site where the Healthy Florida First reports are posted [2] [1], and the testing used a certified lab and EPA Method 6010D to quantify total arsenic with comparisons to Florida’s own screening benchmarks—an approach that produced headline findings but also sparked substantive industry objections about benchmark selection and the absence of speciation data distinguishing inorganic from organic arsenic [3] [4] [5].