What Paxton Actually Did

On June 2, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton's office issued Civil Investigative Demands — CIDs — to Bayer, maker of Roundup weed killer, and food giant PepsiCo, according to the Texas AG's official press release.

A CID is not a lawsuit. It's a legal tool that compels companies to hand over records before any formal charges are filed. It functions like a subpoena for documents. Paxton's office can examine internal communications, testing data, and marketing materials before deciding whether to file litigation.

No specific food products have been named publicly. No charges have been filed. But the investigation is live.

The Numbers Behind the Probe

Over 250 million pounds of glyphosate are applied across the United States every year, according to Paxton's office. In 1993, about 12 percent of American adults had detectable glyphosate in their bodies. Today, that number is north of 70 percent.

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen back in 2015, specifically linking it to non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Research since then has tied glyphosate exposure to endocrine disruption, infertility, kidney disease, and autoimmune conditions, according to the AG's statement.

The Desiccant Loophole Is the Real Story

The biggest driver of glyphosate in food isn't what farmers spray on crops during the growing season. It's pre-harvest desiccation.

Desiccation means spraying herbicides like Roundup on crops shortly before harvest so they dry down uniformly. Faster, more predictable drying means more efficient harvesting. The problem is that spraying Roundup on your oats right before you pick them means your oats are swimming in glyphosate by the time they hit the cereal box.

According to the Texas AG's office, this pre-harvest practice accounts for more than 90 percent of the glyphosate found in food.

The EPA prohibits using glyphosate as a desiccant on oats grown in the United States. But that restriction doesn't apply to imported oats. Paxton's office alleges that food companies are sourcing oats from foreign countries specifically to circumvent that EPA rule — getting the desiccation benefit without technically breaking U.S. law.

If that allegation holds up, it's not just a health story. It's a consumer fraud story.

The Kids Angle

Paxton's office didn't choose Bayer and PepsiCo randomly. The investigation zeroes in on food products marketed specifically to children — particularly those in the one-to-two-year-old age range.

Texas Scorecard reported that studies have found some of the most heavily glyphosate-contaminated products in the country are those aimed at toddlers. Children ages one to two may face higher dietary glyphosate exposure than any other age group, according to research cited by Paxton's office.

The investigation will examine whether companies violated Texas law through marketing practices or by failing to disclose contamination — essentially, whether parents were lied to.

What Bayer Says

Bayer pushed back. A Bayer spokesperson told Texas Scorecard that "there were a series of inaccurate and misleading claims made in the statements from the Texas Attorney General's office around the use and safety of glyphosate-based products." The company said it has been cooperating with the inquiry and will continue providing information.

Bayer didn't specify which claims were inaccurate. PepsiCo has not issued a public statement.

What the EPA Says — And Why It Matters

The EPA, as recently as a May 5 update, maintained that glyphosate is an effective tool for managing invasive weeds and stated there are "no risks of concern to human health" at current exposure levels — a position that directly contradicts the IARC's 2015 classification.

The EPA sets the legal tolerance levels. The IARC says the chemical probably causes cancer. Both are serious institutions. They flatly disagree. Regulators in the European Union have taken a harder line on glyphosate restrictions than the U.S. has.

Paxton's investigation is essentially arguing that even if something is technically legal under EPA tolerances, companies can still be liable under Texas consumer protection law if they misled consumers about what's in their products.

What's Getting Left Out

Mainstream coverage has largely treated this as a Ken Paxton political story — framing it through his Senate race, which FOX 7 Austin noted is already priced above $160 million for both sides. Paxton is running for U.S. Senate and this is a high-visibility move.

A CID is the beginning of an investigation, not the end. This could result in a lawsuit, a settlement, or nothing.

What It Means for Regular People

If you're buying oat-based products — oatmeal, granola bars, baby cereal — there's a legitimate question about what's in them that no regulator has definitively answered to the public's satisfaction.

Parents buying "healthy" food for toddlers deserve to know if that food contains a probable carcinogen.

The investigation will take months, possibly years. But someone is finally asking the companies for their records.