Hello Kids, Firefly class actions allege fluoride rinses are unsafe for children

Fluoride mouthwash class action lawsuits overview:

• Who: Two groups of parents filed separate class action lawsuits against Hello Products LLC and Perrigo Co.
• Why: The complaints claim Hello Products and Perrigo falsely advertised their respective Hello Kids and Firefly fluoride rinses as safe for young children.
• Where: The class action lawsuits were filed in California and Illinois federal courts. 

Two groups of parents have filed separate class action lawsuits against Hello Products LLC and Perrigo Co. over claims the companies falsely advertised their fluoride rinses as safe for preschool children.

In the case against Hello Products, plaintiffs Amber Miller, Josh Cook and Marina Vasilyeva claim the company markets its Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse specifically to kids despite it allegedly having enough fluoride in it to kill a small child if enough is swallowed. 

Miller, Cook and Vasilyeva argue the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) considers the rinse too dangerous for children under 6 years old and that its labeling gives the impression the product is specially formulated to be safe for young children.

“While Defendant’s labeling conveys the impression that the rinse is specially formulated to be safe for young children, it is not,” the Hello Kids class action says. 

The plaintiffs further argue the Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse comes in candy and fruit flavors that entice children to use and swallow more of the product. 

The lawsuit claims Hello Products is guilty of violating New York’s General Business Law, Illinois’ Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act and California’s Unfair Competition Law. 

The plaintiffs want to represent a class of California, Illinois and New York consumers who purchased Hello Kids Fluoride Rinse for children under the age of 6 within the applicable statutes of limitation and who did so in the absence of direction from a dentist, doctor or health care provider.

Firefly mouth rinse designed to appeal to young children, class action claims

In the case against Perrigo, plaintiffs Erin Gibson, Heather Grabow and Ashley Granger claim the company’s Firefly mouth rinse is marketed in a way to mislead parents into thinking it is safe for young children. 

Gibson, Grabow and Granger argue every aspect of the packaging for the Firefly mouth rinse is designed to appeal to young children, creating a false impression of safety for a product the FDA advises should not be used by children under 6 years old. 

“Every aspect of the packaging is designed to appeal to very young children, including its toy-like appearance, cartoon imagery, bright colored liquid and candy flavors,” the Firefly class action says. 

The plaintiffs further argue Perrigo’s marketing strategy is not only misleading but dangerous, as it encourages the use of a product that can cause severe health issues in young children, including dental fluorosis and acute fluoride toxicity. 

The lawsuit claims Perrigo is guilty of breach of implied warranty of merchantability and violating Illinois’ Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, New York’s General Business Law, California’s Unfair Competition Act and multiple state consumer protection statutes. 

The plaintiffs want to represent a nationwide class of consumers who purchased Firefly mouth rinse for children under the age of 6 within the applicable statutes of limitation and who did so in the absence of direction from a dentist, doctor or health care provider.

In each case, the plaintiffs demand a jury trial and request an award of compensatory, statutory, punitive and treble damages for themselves and all class members. 

A separate group of consumers filed a similar class action lawsuit against Chattem Inc. on Jan. 13 over claims the company falsely advertised its ACT kids mouth rinse as safe for young children. 

Have you purchased Hello Kids or Firefly mouth rinse for a child under the age of 6? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiffs are broadly represented by Michael Connett of Siri & Glimstad LLP.

The Fluoride mouthwash class action lawsuits are Miller, et al. v. Hello Products LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00071-AGS-BLM, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and Gibson, et al. v. Perrigo Co., Case No. 1:25-cv-00348, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Nood class action says ‘fake’ sale prices trick customers
• Pure Leaf tea class action says ‘Brewed in USA’ label is false
• Olay retinol cleanser class action claims products fail to deliver benefits
• GEICO class action claims insurer misleads customers on accident forgiveness