Michelle Pfeiffer Sparks Controversy with Misinformation About Apeel Sciences and Bill Gates
In July 2025, a social media firestorm erupted after actress Michelle Pfeiffer shared posts containing inaccurate information about Apeel Sciences, a food technology company, and its purported connection to billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates. Pfeiffer’s posts alleged that Apeel’s edible coating, used to extend the shelf life of produce, was unsafe, invisible, and “cannot be washed off,” rendering organic produce contaminated. She also implied direct ownership and control of Apeel by Bill Gates, fueling existing online conspiracy theories. These claims quickly spread, prompting responses from Apeel, food safety experts, and eventually, a retraction and apology from Pfeiffer herself.
Apeel Sciences: A Closer Look at the Company and Its Technology
Founded in 2012, Apeel Sciences develops plant-based edible coatings for fruits and vegetables. The company’s flagship product, OrganiPeel, is designed to create a protective barrier that slows down spoilage, reduces water loss, and extends the shelf life of produce. This technology has the potential to significantly reduce food waste, a major contributor to global greenhouse gas emissions, and improve access to fresh produce, particularly in developing countries. Apeel’s coatings are made from plant-derived materials, including lipids and glycerolipids, and are generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). OrganiPeel received formal FDA approval in 2024 and has been used by grocery stores since 2017, further highlighting the inaccuracy of Pfeiffer’s claims that it was a new and untested product.
Debunking the Misinformation: Addressing Pfeiffer’s Claims and the Gates Connection
The controversy stemmed from several key inaccuracies in Pfeiffer’s posts. First, the claim that Apeel’s coating is invisible and impossible to wash off is false. While the coating is thin and does become integrated with the produce’s skin, it can be removed through normal washing practices. Secondly, the alleged link between Bill Gates and Apeel ownership was a gross misrepresentation. While the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation provided two grants totaling approximately $1.1 million to Apeel in its early stages (2012 and 2015), Bill Gates has no ownership stake or operational involvement in the company. These grants were part of the Foundation’s broader efforts to address food security and reduce post-harvest losses in developing countries, aligning with Apeel’s mission.
Apeel’s Response: Setting the Record Straight
Following Pfeiffer’s posts, Apeel Sciences issued a swift and comprehensive response. They refuted the allegations regarding the safety and washability of their product, emphasizing its edible nature and plant-based composition. They also clarified Bill Gates’ limited involvement, emphasizing that his foundation’s grants did not translate to ownership or control. Apeel reiterated its commitment to transparency and provided detailed information about its technology, ingredients, and safety testing on its website and through media outreach. This proactive approach was crucial in mitigating the spread of misinformation and reassuring consumers about the safety and sustainability of their products.
Pfeiffer’s Apology and the Broader Implications
Three weeks after her initial posts, Michelle Pfeiffer issued a public apology on social media. She admitted to sharing outdated and inaccurate information and acknowledged having subsequently spoken with Apeel representatives to learn more about their technology and company structure. Pfeiffer emphasized the importance of verifying information before sharing it publicly, particularly on sensitive topics like food safety. Her apology, while belated, underscored the potential damage caused by the rapid spread of misinformation online and the responsibility of public figures to engage with accurate information.
Navigating the Complex Landscape of Food Technology and Public Trust
The Pfeiffer-Apeel incident highlights the challenges faced by food technology companies operating within a climate of online misinformation and public skepticism. While public figures can play a role in raising awareness about important issues, the spread of unverified claims can undermine trust in scientific innovations and create unnecessary fear. Apeel’s experience demonstrates the importance of balancing transparency and proactive communication with robust scientific backing to address misconceptions and build public trust. This incident serves as a valuable case study in the ongoing conversation around food technology, misinformation, and the responsibility we all share in promoting accurate and informed discussions about the future of our food systems.
