The Baby Food Reality Check

Part 4 of the Baby Food Reality Check

Where to actually look up your brand.

Every covered manufacturer has to publish test results. What nobody tells you is how differently they’ve chosen to do it — and which ones make you buy the product before you can look.

I opened every one of these. They’re sorted by the only question that matters when you’re standing in an aisle: can you see a result without already owning the product?

Check before you buy

No package needed

Open tables or product-name search. You can look these up from the aisle, or from your couch before you order.

~600 rows. Date, stage, item, UPC, all four metals in ppb. The best disclosure of any brand here.
Full dataset on the page, with lot and test date, in ppb and mcg against Prop 65. Good plain-language explainers.
272 results, sortable and filterable by date or ingredient.
Per-product ppb tables, kept current. (Also a finger foods table.)
Type a product name, get every lot ever tested. Also reports pesticides and plasticizers, which AB 899 doesn’t require.
Lot number optional; shows test dates.
States outright that no lot code is needed — a best-by date is enough.
Date code optional; an empty search returns dozens of lots. Numbers sit inside one PDF per lot, so it’s a download each time.
Search by product name, results in ppb. Some older lots show only dashes.
Same platform as Target’s. Search by product name, results in ppb.

Published, but stale or awkward

Check the date

Real numbers exist, but they’re images, PDFs or posts that don’t clearly track the product you’re holding. Look at the date before you take reassurance from them.

A real table, but a static image inside a blog post, labelled 2025.
Links out to a PDF whose address rotates monthly — old copies keep loading, so confirm the date inside the file.
Real ppb figures, but posted as an image from mid-2025 with expiry dates that have already passed.
Screenshots covering 2024–2025, with nothing newer posted.

You need the package in your hand

Buy first, learn after

These require a lot code, batch number or UPC off the physical product — so you can’t compare before buying. This is the exact practice California’s Attorney General flagged in March 2026.

Batch number required. Worth noting the lookup box didn’t render for me on desktop Chrome.
Needs product type plus a best-by date from the package.
Lot number only — no product search at all. The most closed of the group.
Lot or category lookup. Says “every result shared” while showing none up front.
Lot lookup only.
Mostly general education with a bare lot box.
Requires both a UPC and a lot number.
Two honest caveats. First, a tier here reflects how easy the results are to reach — not how clean they are. A brand can publish beautifully and still have a high result, or gate everything and be perfectly fine. Don’t read the green tier as a shopping list. Second, this is a snapshot: pages get rebuilt and files go stale. If you find one of these broken, tell me and I’ll fix it.

Brands not listed either had no page I could confirm, or aren’t covered by the law. Infant formula — including Bobbie — is excluded from AB 899 entirely. For a wider list, the nonprofit Unleaded Kids maintains one, and Consumer Reports rates 39 brands on accessibility.
Keep going
← Back to the full guide

New breakdowns, every week

I read the labels, lab reports and filings, then post the short version. TikTok and Instagram get them first.