Gerber Class Action Says Good Start Formula Can’t Prevent Allergies

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.

A New York woman says Gerber’s Good Start formula is falsely labeled with health claims that are unsupported by scientific evidence.

Plaintiff Wendy Manemeit says defendant Gerber Products Co. has been improperly marketing its Good Start infant formula as the first and only formula that can reduce the risk of developing allergic conditions like atopic dermatitis. Manemeit claims these representations are false and deceptive.

According to the Good Start class action lawsuit, Nestle petitioned the FDA for approval of its claims that partially hydrolyzed whey protein reduced the risk of allergy development in infants.

The FDA rejected that application in 2006, stating that it had found “no credible evidence” that partially hydrolyzed whey protein had any beneficial effect on allergy development.

Similar language was also rejected in 2009, when Gerber sought to claim a link between partially hydrolyzed whey protein and reduced risk of atopic dermatitis. The FDA said Gerber would at least have to add highly qualifying language stating there was “very little scientific evidence” or “little scientific evidence” supporting Gerber’s claim.

Nevertheless, after Nestle acquired Gerber in 2007, Manemeit says the company began falsely promoting Good Start formula for allergy reduction and to reduce the risk of atopic dermatitis – without any of the qualifying language recommended by the FDA.

The alleged false advertisement at issue here began in 2011, Manemeit says. Gerber began shipping Good Start formula with labeling that claimed the product was the “1st & Only Routine Formula TO REDUCE THE RISK OF DEVELOPING ALLERGIES.”

Other labeling bore language that claimed Good Start was “the first and only formula brand … that meets the criteria for a FDA Qualified Health Claim for atopic dermatitis.”

Representations like these are similar to ones that Nestle, Gerber’s parent corporation, has been making since the late 1980s, Manemeit claims.

She says Nestle promoted partially hydrolyzed whey protein infant formulas as being “hypoallergenic” until the FDA stepped in and forced the company to remove that claim from product labels.

Manemeit says she bought about 120 canisters of powdered Good Start formula starting in May 2015, paying around $25 per canister.

She says she decided to buy Good Start based on the content of Gerber’s magazine and television advertisements, relying on the company’s representations that Good Start reduces the risks of allergies and that the company’s health claims for that product had passed FDA muster.

Were it not for those representations, Manemeit says, she either would not have purchased Good Start or would have paid less for it.

Manemeit is proposing to represent a plaintiff Class that would include all persons who purchased Good Start infant formula in the state of New York between May 15, 2011 and the present.

She seeks an award of actual, statutory and punitive damages, restitution and disgorgement, attorneys’ fees, and costs of litigation.

Plaintiff’s counsel includes attorneys Michael R. Reese and George V. Granade of Reese LLP, with assistance from attorneys from Taus Cebulash & Landau LLP, Berger & Montague PC, and Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group.

The Good Start Formula False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Wendy Manemeit v. Gerber Products Co., et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-00093, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.