Testing Transparency

In recent years, conversations around contaminants such as heavy metals, pesticides, and microplastics in our food have moved into the mainstream. As scrutiny of our food system grows, transparency isn’t just important, it’s the standard we believe in.

At Equip, we believe transparency doesn’t stop at saying we test. It means explaining what we test for, how we test, and just as importantly, how to interpret the results.

This article brings together the work we do every day to prioritize safety, quality, and honesty, including a real-world testing exercise that compares protein powders to everyday whole foods.

Why Heavy Metals Are Showing Up in the Conversation

Heavy metals like lead, cadmium, arsenic, and mercury are naturally occurring elements found in soil. Because of this, they appear in trace amounts, in virtually every whole food on the planet – whether grown in your own backyard or bought at a major grocer.

Recent reports have highlighted detectable levels of heavy metals in protein powders, raising understandable concern. But without proper context, these headlines can be misleading.

So instead of speculating, we decided to test and compare.

Putting Results in Context: Testing Protein Powders and Real Foods

Rather than testing supplements in isolation, we partnered with an ISO-accredited third-party lab, Light Labs, to analyze a range of organic whole foods people eat every day, alongside protein powders.

What We Tested

We tested for heavy metals in:

• Our Prime Protein
• Organic vegetables
• Organic leafy greens
• Organic cocoa powder
• Wild-caught seafood

All samples were tested using the same lab methods and reporting units.

The goal: not to minimize contamination concerns, but to provide honest context about where heavy metals actually show up in the food supply.

Heavy Metals Results, Protein vs. Whole Foods

What the results showed:

• Most of the organic whole foods we tested were higher in heavy metals than our Prime Protein.
• Leafy greens and cocoa-based foods were often among the highest.
• Protein powders were not uniquely problematic when viewed within a full dietary context though plant-based protein tested materially higher than animal-based sources.

This reinforced something we’ve believed for a long time: the presence of trace heavy metals must be evaluated relative to real foods, not in isolation.

Prop 65: What You Need to Know

Many brands, including Equip, use California’s Proposition 65 limits as a reference point when sharing heavy-metal test results. It’s a widely recognized benchmark, but it’s important to understand what Prop 65 is, and what it isn’t.

Prop 65 is a California consumer disclosure law from 1986, not a U.S. food safety standard. It has long come under criticism for its overly stringent approach to potentially (the key word here) harmful substances, using a wildly conservative 1,000X safety factor to determine the reference level of 0.5 micrograms per day. The standards set in Prop65 are hundreds of times more conservative than NSF, EU, FDA and other international standards with little to no scientific basis. That being said, it is still the standard we hold ourselves to at Equip.

As a result of this hyper-conservative standard many everyday whole foods routinely exceed Prop 65’s conservative threshold, despite being widely recognized as healthy and nutrient-dense.

We view Prop 65 as one conservative reference point, not a true measure of safety. That’s why we pair rigorous third-party testing with real-food comparisons and transparent reporting, so customers can make informed decisions grounded in reality.

What Actually Matters: Dose, Frequency, and Transparency

Detecting a substance is not the same as determining risk.

What matters is:

• Amount per serving
• How often it’s consumed
• Total exposure across the diet
• Whether results are disclosed clearly and accurately

What We Test For 

We implement comprehensive testing protocols that screen for various contaminants known to compromise food quality and safety. Here are the key substances we test for:

• Heavy metals. We specifically look for arsenic, cadmium, mercury, and lead. These metals can infiltrate food through environmental factors, including soil contamination and water sources. Their presence in food items can pose serious health risks if accumulated over time.
• Microplastics, BPA, and BPS. Microplastics, BPA, and BPS leach into food products during processing and packaging. They are pervasive in our environment and can be introduced during handling or storage.
• Pesticides and glyphosate. The use of pesticides in agriculture raises concerns over food safety. We assess our ingredients to confirm they do not contain harmful residual chemicals. Glyphosate, a widely used herbicide, has come under scrutiny for its potential health hazards, making it a no-brainer for us to test for its presence.
• Mycotoxins and molds. Mold and mold by-products can develop on various crops and pose serious health risks.
• Microbiological. Pathogens and spoilage organisms to ensure food safety.
• Analytes (a measure of composition). Last but nowhere near least, we want to make sure you’re getting what you think you’re getting. We validate protein claims and the quality of other essential nutrient levels in our products. It’s our commitment that what is on our labels matches what’s inside. 

Many brands claim “third-party tested.” Few explain what that actually means, or share results in a way consumers can understand. We do.

How We Report Results

We report our test results in ppb (parts per billion) or mcg (micrograms), not ppm (parts per million) like some brands. This distinction is crucial, ppm measurements are 1,000 times less precise than ppb. To visualize this difference: measuring in ppm is like identifying a single drop of water in a 13-gallon bucket, while ppb pinpoints that same drop in a 13,000-gallon bucket. When monitoring substances that can be harmful at microscopic levels, this precision matters tremendously. Our ppb standard provides the detailed information you need to make truly informed decisions about what you consume.

Transparency isn’t a marketing slogan for us, it’s a system.

The Bottom Line

• Heavy metals exist throughout the food supply, including whole foods
• Testing without context creates unnecessary fear
• Transparency without explanation isn’t real transparency

By testing comprehensively and comparing supplements to real foods, we aim to give customers information, not alarmism.

Our commitment is simple:

• Test thoroughly
• Make the information easily accessible – testing results are available on our product display pages or by request at hello@equipfoods.com
• Provide context
• Raise the standard for the entire industry

If you ever have questions about our testing, our results, or how to interpret them, we’re always open to the conversation.