Nature’s Bounty Class Action Says Biotin Supplement Labels are Misleading

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.

NBTY Inc. and Nature’s Bounty Inc. face a class action lawsuit alleging their Biotin supplements labeled with the claim “Supports Healthy Hair, Skin, and Nails,” are misleading.

Plaintiff Rosa Alvarez of San Diego, Calif., argues that the Biotin labels are deceptive because most people in the United States already ingest more than the adequate intake set by The Institute of Medicine.

“The Institute of Medicine has set an adequate intake (AI) for biotin at 30 micrograms (mcg) per day for people 19 years and older and even less for younger people,” the lawsuit states. And for the general population the daily ingestion is already 30 mcg – 60 mcg daily.

Moreover, the contention is that there’s a limited amount of daily biotin necessary to perform enzymatic functions in the body, specifically as it is used as a co-factor, to assist an enzyme in performing these biochemical functions. And so, if the human body was to consume more than the finite amount, “saturation occurs and the body just does not use this surplus biotin.”

Alvarez says she’s purchased Nature’s Bounty Biotin 10,000 mcg Health & Beauty rapid release liquid soft gels, numerous times between 2014 and early 2015. She claims that she bought the product because she relied on the label claims that it would in fact help in the growth of hair, skin or nails.

Alvarez contends that she would not have purchased the product had she known that it does not really support the growth of hair, skin or nails.

The Biotin products listed in this lawsuit include:

• Biotin 5000 mcg
• Super Potency Biotin 5000 mcg
• Quick Dissolve Biotin 5000 mcg
• Biotin 10,000 mcg rapid release soft gels
• Biotin 10,000 mcg Health and Beauty rapid release liquid soft gels

According to the class action lawsuit, the only affect that biotin supplements would have in benefiting the growth of hair, skin or nails would be for a percentage of the population who suffer from “frank” deficiency, or “those with rare biotin deficiency conditions.”

However, Alvarez says that the defendant “cannot represent that their biotin products help treat or cure the symptoms of these diseases, as FDA law precludes manufacturers of dietary supplements from representing that their dietary supplements treat or cure diseases.”

Therefore, the plaintiff contends, the defendant cannot make the claim that the biotin products support the health of hair, skin, and nails as represented because the need for biotin is of little concern for most the population who are not biotin deficient.

Alvarez argues that the products’ labels are misleading, and brings the action to halt the defendant’s false claims. She also is seeking relief for all those who purchased the Biotin items in California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, and Washington.

The plaintiff is represented by Patricia N. Syverson, Manfred P. Muecke, Elaine A. Ryan, and Carrie A. Laliberte of Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint PC, and Stewart M. Weltman and Michael Chang of Siprut PC.

The Nature’s Bounty Biotin Class Action Lawsuit is Rosa Alvarez v. NBTY Inc. and Nature’s Bounty Inc., Case 3:17-cv-00567-BAS-BGS, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.