Glucosamine Supplement Lawsuit Allegations Against Osteo Bi-Flex Include False Advertising

Consumers who have purchased certain supplements believing they could improve joint health have filed a number of chondroitin and glucosamine supplement lawsuits.

For years, many companies have promoted and marketed supplements containing chondroitin and glucosamine, falsely crediting the products with the ability to relieve joint pain, joint stiffness and arthritis.

Osteo Bi-Flex by Rexall Sundown is among the products that have faced at least one glucosamine supplement lawsuit due to their false marketing claims that the product provides markedly improved joint health benefits.

Consumers say Osteo Bi-Flex is basically worthless because none of the ingredients do anything to improve joint health or to reduce pain or inflammation.

Among the Osteo Bi-Flex products currently under investigation are Osteo Bi-Flex One Per Day; Osteo Bi-Flex Triple Strength; Osteo Bi-Flex Triple Strength MSM; and Osteo Bi-Flex Triple Strength with Vitamin D.

The main ingredient in each of the products is glucosamine hydrochloride, which is a combination of glucosamine and hydrochloric acid. The glucosamine is an amino sugar derived from shellfish. Both glucosamine and chondroitin are components of human cartilage, and the substances act as building blocks for the creation of more cartilage.

However, consumers say there is no scientific evidence that taking supplements that contain either glucosamine or chondroitin actually benefit the production or the health of cartilage.

Glucosamine Supplement Lawsuit Cites NIH Studies

According to one glucosamine supplement lawsuit, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored a series of studies called the Glucosamine/Chondroitin Arthritis Intervention Trials (GAIT).

In 2006, the results of the GAIT study that looked at 1,583 patients for two years were published in the New England Journal of Medicine and said, “the analysis of the primary outcome measure did not show that either [glucosamine or chondroitin] alone or in combination, was efficacious …” despite marketing claims otherwise.

In 2008, another analysis of the GAIT studies looked at the progressive loss of joint space width, which measured the reduction of cartilage in the joints. The analysis found no evidence that the supplements helped rebuild cartilage.

The NIH released another set of results from the GAIT studies in 2010 that found neither glucosamine nor chondroitin provide any benefits regarding pain, function, stiffness or mobility.

The glucosamine supplement lawsuit also mentions an independent, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that tested a diet and exercise program and 1500mg of glucosamine or a placebo on 407 women who were at high risk for knee osteoarthritis.

The researchers said that after two and a half years of taking glucosamine daily, the patients did not experience any effects on knee pain, physical function or the incidence of arthritis.

In addition, several professional organizations have refused to promote Osteo Bi-Flex or similar supplements.

In 2008, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons recommended that “glucosamine and sulfate or hydrochloride not be prescribed for patients with symptomatic OA (osteoarthritis) of the knee” in the organization’s guidelines for the Treatment of Osteoarthritis of the Knee.

That statement was based on the findings of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, which said in 2007 that neither glucosamine nor chondroitin have any clinical benefit in patients suffering from osteoarthritis of the knee.

The Glucosamine Supplement Lawsuit is Case No. 3:17-cv-01243-JAH-JMA in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.

Join a Free Glucosamine Chondroitin Class Action Lawsuit Investigation

If you purchased a glucosamine or chondroitin product after seeing the joint health claims made about the product’s effectiveness, you may qualify to file or join a false advertising class action lawsuit.

Get a Free Case Evaluation Now