Vitamin Shoppe Class Action Challenges St. John’s Wort Label Claims

Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract fails to provide the concentration promised on the product’s label, according to an Illinois woman.

Plaintiff Steffani Pratico alleges the St. John’s wort extract marketed by defendant Vitamin Shoppe Inc. contains inconsistent amounts of the active ingredient hypericin.

The product is so inconsistent as to fail to conform to its related labeling and advertising, in violation of consumer protection laws, Pratico claims.

St. John’s wort extract has a reputation for anti-depressant effects, according to Pratico. The Supplement Information labeling for Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract breaks out separate measurements for the product’s content of hypericin, which Pratico says is its active ingredient.

The Vitamin Shoppe class action lawsuit includes an image of a container of Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract. Among other representations, the label on the container shows the indication “300mg 0.3% hypericin.” On the back label, the Supplement Facts section says the product has been “std. to 0.3% Hypericin, (0.9 mg).”

Questions were raised over these representations when the consumer advocacy group ConsumerLab.com conducted testing on Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract.

That testing allegedly revealed lower levels of hypericin than stated on the label, according to Pratico. She says ConsumerLab’s testing revealed between .036 mg and .11 mg of hypericin – only four to 12 percent of the amount claimed on the label.

Pratico says she then had her own testing done, which also revealed lower hypericin content – only .207 mg, or 23 percent of the label’s claim.

Part of the alleged problem may have to do with a lack of regulation at the federal level, according to Pratico’s Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract class action lawsuit. While the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act provides some regulatory authority, the FDA has not provided any regulatory definition for “standardized” extracts, Pratico claims.

But non-regulatory standards for herbal extracts exist within the industry, Pratico says. She quotes a definition from supplement manufacturer NOW Foods that says the intent behind standardization is “to guarantee that the consumer is getting a product in which the chemistry is consistent from batch to batch.”

Pratico says that in October 2016 she bought Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract from a Vitamin Shoppe store in Chicago. She believes that she and other consumers have been unlawfully misled by the representations on the product’s labeling.

Had she known the product had significantly lower concentration of hypericin than what was stated on the label, the plaintiff says she never would have bought it.

Pratico is proposing to represent a plaintiff Class that would include all persons in the U.S. who purchased Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s wort extract. She is also proposing one subclass of Class Members from California, Florida, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, and Washington, and another subclass of Class Members from Illinois.

She seeks an award of damages, including statutory and punitive damages, and a court order stopping Vitamin Shoppe from continuing the allegedly unlawful conduct complained of here. Pratico is also asking for reimbursement of court costs and attorneys’ fees, and for pre- and post-judgment interest on all outstanding amounts.

The plaintiff is represented by attorneys Michael L. Silverman and Klint L. Bruno of The Bruno Firm, and Nick Suciu III of Barbat Mansour & Suciu PLLC.

The Vitamin Shoppe St. John’s Wort Extract Class Action Lawsuit is Steffani Pratico v. Vitamin Shoppe Inc., Case No. 1:17-cv-00899, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.