Enfagrow Lawsuit Alleges Toddler Drinks Are Misbranded Due to FDA-Prohibited Nutrient Content Label Claims

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

The makers of Enfagrow Premium Toddler Nutritional Drink and Enfagrow NeuroPro Toddler Nutritional Drink face a proposed class action lawsuit that alleges the items are illegally misbranded due to unapproved nutrient content claims that appear on product labels.

Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.

The 34-page Enfagrow lawsuit emphasizes that the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) expressly prohibits the kind of nutrient content claims that appear on the product labels of Enfagrow Premium and NeuroPro toddler drinks. In particular, FDA regulations specify that no nutrient content claim—that is, any direct statement about the level or range of a nutrient in a food—may appear on product labels for foods intended for children under two years old, the complaint states.

The Enfagrow nutrient content claims at issue include the product-label statements “22 Nutrients to help support growth,” “Immune Health Dual Prebiotics & Vitamins,” and “supports Brain Development Omega-3 DHA & Iron,” the case against manufacturers Mead Johnson & Company, Mead Johnson Nutrition Company and Reckitt Benckiser relays.

“These claims deceive and mislead reasonable consumers into believing that the Products provide physical health benefits for their child when in fact, the Products are harmful for children under two both nutritionally and developmentally,” the proposed class action summarizes.

Children under two have certain dietary needs as they experience tremendous amounts of growth while eating “relatively little solid food,” and it is crucial that they receive nutrient-dense foods, the filing shares. In fact, the dietary needs of children under two go beyond mere nutrition and include establishing healthy eating habits and developing motor skills, the case adds. Per the lawsuit, the American Academy of Pediatrics has warned that specialty formula milks for older infants and young children are generally “unnecessary” and that claims regarding brain development and immune function could falsely imply that formula products are healthier than cow’s milk.

According to the lawsuit, the misbranding of the Enfagrow toddler drinks has induced consumers to pay a premium price for products that do not provide the implied physical health benefits and could even be harmful to young children given they contain added sugar.

Further, the case alleges the Enfagrow drinks are “unlawfully fortified” in light of the label claims that the products contain added, or more, vitamin C and zinc sulfate. 

“There is no recognition by the scientific community that there is a dietary insufficiency in Vitamin C or zinc,” the suit contends.

The Enfagrow class action lawsuit looks to cover all individuals in California who bought Enfagrow Premium Toddler Nutritional Drink and/or Enfagrow NeuroPro Toddler Nutritional Drink between 2021 and the present.

Are you owed unclaimed settlement money? Check out our class action rebates page full of open