It’s the middle of Girl Scout Cookie season across the US. And we’ve already covered the obligatory season-opening critique of new new and returning flavours. Now, there’s a debate about whether Girl Scout Cookies contain ‘toxins’!
New French Toast Girl Scout Cookies…
Is nothing safe? Nothing sacred? How could such a thing come to pass? A new class action lawsuit has been announced claiming that GSCs contain toxic metals and forbidden pesticides…
What’s going on?
New York State mom Amy Mayo is leading the suit, which is based on a 2024 research study com-missioned by Moms Across America and GMO Science, which tested the cookies for toxic metals and the herbicide glyphosate/AMPA pesticide.
The statement of claim says, “100 percent of the samples were positive for glyphosate, 100 percent were positive for toxic metals, 22 out of 25 (88 percent) of samples were positive for all five toxic metals, 76 percent were positive for levels of cadmium that exceed EPA limits in water, and 24 out of 25 (96 percent) of samples were positive for lead.”
Mayo claims she would have paid, “substantially less,” or not purchased the cookies at all had the organization disclosed the, “dangerous toxins.”
The lawsuit seeks $5 million in damages to be paid to US cookie buyers, plus an injunction requiring Girl Scouts to add appropriate disclosures to its packaging.
Failed self and members’ too
The suit goes on to claim that Girl Scouts USA (GSUSA) not only failed its cookie customers by not providing disclaimers, but failed its own members and itself, as a trusted organization.
“While the entire sales practice system for Girl Scout Cookies is built on a foundation of ethics and teaching young girls sustainable business practices, defendants failed to uphold this standard themselves,” the lawsuit claims.
Some serious weakness…
A Food & Wine story on the suit points out, “[I]t’s critical to note that this study was not peer-reviewed, nor was it published in a scientific or academic journal that [would] call for that kind of rigorous background.
Furthermore, “It also had a very small sample size, testing and purchasing only 25 cookies across three states: California, Iowa, and Louisiana. And: “It also had a very small sample size, testing and purchasing only 25 cookies across three states: California, Iowa, and Louisiana.”
And, as USA Today adds, “[T]he study compared the levels of heavy metals and glyphosate to Envi-ronmental Protection Agency standards, rather than those set by the Food and Drug Administration.”
These are all considered serious flaws in the academic world, and are usually ‘disclaimered’ in the published official reports of serious scientific research study results.
My take
As someone who passes on to our readers the results of important scientific research studies reg-ularly, I appreciate the serious of the ‘flaws’ called out in Food & Wine and USA Today. The question remains, are there official ‘safe’ levels of the toxins in question? If so, how do the cookie levels stack up?
I have one further question: Was it a coincidence? Or was the timing of this suit intentionally set to come right in the middle of the busiest season for Girl Scout Cookies? As a tactic to press GSUSA into a quick settlement, rather than dragging the matter out through court for embarrassing month after embarrassing month?
We’ll definitely follow this one, as it unfolds both in court and outside.
~ Maggie J.