Plaintiff Launches New Osteo Bi-Flex Class Action Lawsuit

A California woman alleges that a popular joint health product does not offer the benefits its advertising claims in her recent Osteo Bi-Flex class action lawsuit.

According to the Osteo Bi-Flex class action lawsuit, this glucosamine-based joint health product does not actually have the benefits its marketing and advertising claims to provide. Advertisements allegedly indicate that Osteo Bi-Flex products offer joint health benefits, but the Osteo Bi-Flex class action lawsuit alleges that its actual benefits are negligible.

The plaintiff, Sandra S., is a resident of San Diego. Sandra says she found and purchased the Osteo Bi-Flex health product on Feb. 20, 2017, from a Walgreens store. She says her decision was based on the representation of the glucosamine product as extremely beneficial for joint health.

The product was priced at $31.99, and given that she alleges there were actually no joint health benefits of taking glucosamine (the reason she purchased the product), Sandra claims she and other customers lost out on the full price of the product. Indeed, had Sandra been aware that the product held no real health benefits, she says she would never have bought the product in the first place, according to the legal claim.

Sandra filed her Osteo Bi-Flex class action lawsuit on behalf of not only herself but also other consumers similarly situated.

Glucosamine Joint Health Basics

Glucosamine joint health products like Osteo Bi-Flex allegedly claim to provide important joint health benefits. These include relief from joint pain, joint stiffness, and arthritis. But more and more customers like Sandra are claiming that their glucosamine joint health products do not actually provide the proclaimed health benefits.

Glucosamine joint health products involved in a current class action investigation include Osteo Bi-Flex, Schiff Move Free, Costco’s Kirkland Signature Glucosamine, Joint Juice, and several others. A full list of the glucosamine joint health products being investigated is listed on our main investigation page.

Filing a Glucosamine Lawsuit

This Osteo Bi-Flex class action lawsuit is not the only glucosamine legal action to have been filed over false advertising claims. Glucosamine joint health lawsuits date back to at least as early as 2013.

Plaintiffs reference a number of scientific studies over glucosamine joint health products. The studies allegedly conclude that glucosamine does not actually work. One 2014 analysis concluded that glucosamine has “no clinically important effect.”

Another study published in 2006 in The New England Journal of Medicine found that “glucosamine and chondroitin sulfate alone or in combination did not reduce pain effectively in the overall group of patients with osteoarthritis of the knee.” A 2015 study found that glucosamine has “no impact on the relief of [osteoarthritis] symptoms.” The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) actually recommends that people not use glucosamine for joint pain relief.

According to glucosamine lawsuits, makers of these glucosamine joint health products are aware that their products do not provide the benefits their advertising claims. Yet these companies continue to use allegedly false advertising practices, in violation of consumer protection laws.

If you have purchased glucosamine joint health products like Osteo Bi-Flex believing the health benefit claims made in advertisements, you may be entitled to a legal claim or able to join a class action lawsuit.

The Osteo Bi-Flex Class Action 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