Selsun Blue Natural Anti-Dandruff Shampoo Isn’t Natural, Claims Class Action Lawsuit

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Update:

• A New York federal judge tossed out the class action lawsuit filed by plaintiff Jimmy Mustakis against Chattem Inc. in an order filed Mar. 9.
• U. S. District Judge Gary R. Brown said Mustakis’ claims that the company misled consumers into believing its Selsun Blue shampoo was “natural” were misplaced.
• Brown said Chattem Inc. was upfront with consumers that the product contains salicylic acid, and that it’s well known that the ingredient is harmful and “anything but safe and healthy.”
• Mustakis’ lawsuit had zeroed in on Chattem’s use of the word “natural,” which was largely printed on the label.
• The judge said he was not convinced that a reasonable consumer would be misled since “Anti-dandruff Shampoo / Salicylic acid 3%” appears directly beneath the word natural.

(12/08/2022)

The maker of Selsun Blue is facing a class action lawsuit from a consumer who claims the company’s supposedly natural anti-dandruff shampoo actually contains a number of synthetic ingredients.

Lead plaintiff Jimmy Mustakis filed his class action lawsuit in federal court Monday, alleging the company sells its natural anti-dandruff shampoo through a marketing campaign that makes false claims in an “appeal to health-conscious consumers.”

Mustakis argues that consumers have become more concerned about the chemicals and other synthetic ingredients in the products they purchase, from food to bath and beauty products.

And, he says, companies have begun to capitalize on that concern by charging a premium for “natural” products.

“Indeed,” the class action lawsuit says, “consumers are willing to pay, and have paid, a premium for products branded ‘natural’ over products that contain synthetic ingredients.”

According to the complaint, sales of natural products grew 9.5% in 2015 to $180 billion.

The plaintiff says he purchased the supposedly natural anti-dandruff shampoo due to Selsun Blue’s representations, believing the product did not contain any synthetic ingredients.

Mustakis says he “believes a synthetic ingredient is formulated or manufactured by a chemical process or by a process that chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally occurring plant, animal, or mineral sources.”

While the Selsun Blue natural anti-dandruff shampoo’s label prominently represents that the product is “natural,” the class action lawsuit says that claim is false and misleading because it contains synthetic ingredients such as tocopheryl acetate, benzyl alcohol, disodium EDTA, citric acid and others.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 2013 issued guidance for classifying products as natural or synthetic, Mustakis says. Under this guidance, a substance can be considered “natural” if it is “manufactured, produced, or extracted from a natural source,” has not had a structural chemical change or the chemical change was created via a “naturally occurring biological process” such as fermentation, or through heating.

Similarly, the class action lawsuit says Congress defines something as “synthetic” if it is “‘a substance that is formulated or manufactured by a chemical process or by a process that chemically changes a substance extracted from naturally occurring plants, animals, or mineral sources.”

Mustakis argues that reasonable consumers lack the ability to independently verify a product is natural at the time they want to purchase the product and are not expected to inspect the label’s ingredient list to confirm the product is “natural.”

The class action lawsuit argues the defendant knew the natural anti-dandruff shampoo was not, in fact, natural, but represented it as such anyway in order to mislead the public because the company knew consumers would pay more for a “natural” product.

As a result, consumers paid money for a product that was not as Selsun Blue represented and were “deprived of the benefit of the bargain” they thought they were getting because the value of the natural anti-dandruff shampoo was less than they paid for it.

The plaintiff says had Selsun Blue not made these deceptive representations, neither he nor Class Members would have paid as much as they did for the natural anti-dandruff shampoo.

Mustakis seeks to represent a Class of consumers who purchased the Selsun Blue natural anti-dandruff shampoo anywhere in the U.S. during the Class Period, as well as a subclass for New York state residents.

The defendant is formally accused of unjust enrichment, breach of express warranty and violations of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and New York General Business Law.

Mustakis says the company violated New York business law by putting “a false description or other indication of or respecting the kind of such article or any part thereof” on the product label and by selling an item that to the company’s knowledge “is falsely described or indicated upon any such package, or vessel containing the same, or label thereupon, in any of the particulars specified.”

With his class action lawsuit, Mustakis seeks injunctive relief directing the defendant to correct its practices to comply with consumer protection laws. He also seeks monetary, treble, statutory and punitive damages, as well as court costs and any other relief the Court deems appropriate.

Have you used Selsun Blue natural anti-dandruff shampoo? Tell us about your experience in the comments below.

The plaintiff is represented by Jason P. Sultzer and Joseph Lipari of the Sultzer Law Group PC and Michael R. Reese of Reese LLP. 

The Selsun Blue Natural Anti-Dandruff Shampoo Class Action Lawsuit is Jimmy Mustakis, et al. v. Sanofi US, Case No. 2:20-cv-05895, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]