Burt’s Bees Class Action Says Cosmetics Contain Harmful ‘Forever Chemicals’

Clorox, Burt’s Bees Class Action Lawsuit Overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Daniela Gruen filed a class action lawsuit against Burt’s Bees and Clorox.
• Why: The Clorox class action lawsuit alleges Burt’s Bees products do not disclose that they contain harmful “forever chemicals.”
• Where: The lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

The Clorox Company and The Burt’s Bees Products Company are facing a class action lawsuit alleging Burt’s Bees cosmetic products contain unsafe “forever chemicals” that pose a risk to human health.

Plaintiff Daniela Gruen alleges Burt’s Bees has built a strong reputation and consumer trust by selling products that are of reliable quality. Clorox purchased the company in 2007 and continues to tout the safety of Burt’s Bees products, marketing them as “kind to skin & planet.”

The Burt’s Bee’s website claims that its products are “consciously crafted with ingredients from nature,” all “over 95% natural origin” and formulated without “chemicals of concern.” 

However, Gruen says that Clorox and Burt’s Bees fail to disclose that its products contain unsafe per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of synthetic chemicals known to pose a risk to humans and the environment.

Burt’s Bees Class Action Says PFAS Pose Significant Health Risk to Humans

“PFAS have become known as ‘forever chemicals’ because the carbon-fluorine bonds in PFAS are extremely strong and thus are not appreciably degraded under environmental conditions,” the Burt’s Bees class action lawsuit states.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has reportedly determined that PFAS are linked to serious health problems, including cancer, decreased fertility, liver damage and increased risk of asthma and thyroid disease.

The Burt’s Bees products are not safe because they contain PFAS that have a detrimental effect on human health, according to the Burt’s Bees class action lawsuit.

Independent testing of Burt’s Bees products has reportedly shown that they contain PFAS even though the ingredients lists do not disclose the presence of these forever chemicals, Gruen says.

Gruen says she has purchased several Burt’s Bees products, including Burt’s Bees Nourishing Mascara, Lip Shimmer and Lip Gloss. The packaging for these products did not disclose that they contained PFAS, according to the Burt’s Bees class action lawsuit. 

“No reasonable consumer would have purchased, or paid as much, for the Products had they known products contained harmful ingredients linked to adverse health effects in humans,” the Burt’s Bees PFAS class action lawsuit alleges.

Gruen filed the Burt’s Bees class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and a proposed class of consumers who purchased Burt’s Bees cosmetics products that contain PFAS.

She is asking for compensatory, statutory, and punitive damages, injunctive relief, restitution, prejudgment interest and other relief.

Join a Toxic Makeup Class Action Lawsuit Investigation (links to paid attorney advertising).

Gruen is represented by Danielle L. Perry and Gary E. Mason of Mason Lietz & Klinger LLP and by Jonathan Shub and Kevin Laukaitis of Shub Law Firm LLC.

The Burt’s Bees Toxic Chemicals Class Action Lawsuit is Daniela Gruen v. The Clorox Company, et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-00935, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Amplify Energy Faces Another Class Action Lodged by Coastal Businesses After California Oil Spill
• Amplify Energy Waited Hours Before Stopping Oil Spill Off Southern California Coast, Class Action Claims
• Homeowners Claim Amplify Energy, Beta Offshore Responsible For Oil Spill Off California Coast
• Sierra Club, Texas Environmental Groups Hit Back at ExxonMobil Over $14M Order