‘Sugar Free’ Liquid I.V. Electrolyte Drink Mixes Contain Sugar, Class Action Lawsuit Claims

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit alleges that The LIV Group has misled consumers by falsely advertising that certain of its Liquid I.V. Hydration Multiplier drink mixes contain no sugar.

Get class action lawsuit and class action settlement news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter.

The 40-page lawsuit claims that certain Liquid I.V. powdered electrolyte drink mixes are misleadingly marketed as a “0 sugar hydration solution,” with prominent front-label representations that they are “Sugar Free” and a Nutrition Facts panel disclosure of “Total Sugars 0g,” even though each mix contains four or five grams of allulose, which is considered to be a sugar under applicable federal and California food labeling standards.

According to the suit, consumers are willing to pay more for products that are labeled as sugar free, particularly because widespread public-health guidance recommends limiting the consumption of added sugars. Food and beverage manufacturers, including the maker of Liquid I.V., are “acutely aware” of increased demand for zero-sugar products that consumers perceive as healthier, the case states.

The lawsuit contends that the Liquid I.V. Sugar Free drink mix’s marketing and advertising materials are misleading to consumers, given that the predominant ingredient in the products is allulose, a monosaccharide, or simple sugar. Per the case, allulose has approximately 70 percent of the sweetness of regular sucrose and is used as a sugar substitute.

The complaint says that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has recognized that allulose is a sugar, stating in its 2016 Nutrition Facts guidance that allulose “must be included” in the “Total Sugars” category of a given food product’s Nutrition Facts panel.

Additionally, food products can be lawfully described as “sugar free” only when they contain less than 0.5 grams of sugar per reference amount customarily consumed and per labeled serving, the case states. Each serving of the sugar-free Liquid I.V. drink mix contains four or five grams of allulose, at least eight times the amount of the 0.5-gram cutoff, the suit conveys.

Further, although packaging for the drink mixes includes a disclosure that allulose “Adds A Dietarily Insignificant Amount of Sugar,” this claim is inaccurate and misleading, as a minimum of four grams of allulose per serving is not a trivial or negligible amount of sugar, the filing states.

“Because the Products’ labels include deceptive and impermissible nutrient-content claims, the Products are ‘misbranded’ under federal law,” the case claims.

The complaint adds that because allulose is not a common household ingredient, most consumers are unlikely to recognize or infer that it is a sugar when it is “concealed” behind a name they do not recognize. Consumers who review Liquid I.V.’s Nutrition Facts panel do not have “specialized knowledge of carbohydrate chemistry” and reasonably believe that a label expressly stating that the drink mix contains no sugar is truthful, the lawsuit says.

The Liquid I.V. class action lawsuit looks to cover all individuals in the United States who, during the maximum period of time permitted by law, purchased Liquid I.V. Hydration Multiplier Electrolyte Sugar-Free drink mixes or the Sugar-Free Energy Multiplier for their personal use.

Check out ClassAction.org’s lawsuit list for the latest open class actions.