What follow‑up testing or manufacturer responses have been published since Lead Safe Mama’s 2025 toothpaste findings?
Executive summary
Lead Safe Mama (LSM) continued an aggressive, community‑funded testing campaign after its initial 2025 toothpaste releases, publishing expanded lab reports, an updated comparative chart and a “lab‑tested safer choices” list while fundraising to test many more brands [1] [2] [3]. Public evidence from the sources provided shows few—if any—public manufacturer commitments to reformulate or undertake corrective testing, and major outlets reported that companies LSM tested had not said they would remove lead from products [4] [5].
1. Expanded, independent follow‑up testing led by Lead Safe Mama
After the first round of community‑funded tests in early 2025, LSM published multiple individual third‑party lab reports and an updated comparative chart summarizing toxicant levels across dozens of toothpaste products, stating that its testing program had grown to cover dozens of products and that raw lab reports were being posted publicly [1] [2] [6]. LSM’s public materials and Patreon updates show a running total of product tests (51 then 53 reported in press coverage) and ongoing campaigns to fund additional analyses of nominated brands via GoFundMe and Patreon [6] [3].
2. New results: both “non‑detects” and additional positives
LSM’s published materials indicate mixed outcomes from follow‑up tests: the organization reported several products returned “non‑detect” results for lead, cadmium, mercury and arsenic, while other follow‑up reports found additional contaminations — for example, an Italian Marvis toothpaste that LSM reported tested positive for mercury — and specific brand reports (Radius, others) showing lead, cadmium and arsenic in some samples [7] [8] [9]. Fortune and LSM summaries quantified the broader sweep: LSM reported lead in roughly 90% of the initial 51 products and arsenic in about 65%, with mercury and cadmium also found in substantial shares of samples [5].
3. Public documentation and “safer choices” guidance
LSM centralized its follow‑up outputs: a lab report landing page, an updated PDF chart comparing toxicant profiles, and a curated “lab‑tested safer choices” list that highlights products with nondetect results to guide consumers [1] [2] [10]. LSM has also used Patreon and blog posts to publish individual lab reports and interim updates while soliciting funds to complete additional tests, signaling a sustained community‑science model rather than a one‑off study [8] [3].
4. Manufacturer responses — limited, no broad commitments documented
Reporting cited by The Guardian and other outlets states that, as of mid‑April 2025, “none of the companies Lead Safe Mama checked have said they will work to get lead out of their product,” a statement attributed to LSM founder Tamara Rubin and reflected in multiple news summaries [4]. The set of sources provided does not include detailed statements from specific manufacturers acknowledging LSM’s lab reports, announcing reformulations, or publishing independent confirmatory testing; therefore the public record in these sources shows little evidence of substantive manufacturer commitments or corrective action as of the reporting captured here [4].
5. Media and third‑party reactions, and limits of the record
Mainstream outlets (Guardian, Fortune, Newsweek) amplified LSM’s expanded dataset and framed the findings alongside regulatory context — noting federal FDA tooth‑paste lead limits are higher than some advocacy thresholds used by LSM — and many professional or dental blogs produced critical or explanatory pieces evaluating the claims [4] [5] [11] [12]. Independent dentist and industry commentaries have also begun to scrutinize methodology and produce counter‑analyses, but the sources provided do not contain manufacturer rebuttals, formal recalls, or regulator‑led confirmatory testing outcomes; that absence limits conclusions about corporate responsiveness beyond what LSM and media have reported [13] [12].
6. Bottom line and next steps for verification
The clearest published follow‑up since LSM’s 2025 revelations is more community‑funded lab testing, public posting of lab reports and an evolving safer‑choices list from LSM itself; press coverage documents LSM’s expanded dataset and flags the lack of public manufacturer pledges to remediate [1] [2] [4]. What remains unresolved in the materials supplied here is whether manufacturers have conducted their own confirmatory testing, engaged regulators, or initiated reformulation — those actions are not documented in the provided sources, so further reporting should target company statements, FDA responses and independent confirmatory labs for a complete picture.