A proposed class action alleges nine varieties of EltaMD “Transparent Zinc Oxide” sunscreens are misleadingly advertised in that they contain harmful active ingredients in addition to zinc oxide, a premium mineral ingredient.
According to the 37-page lawsuit, the front labels of certain EltaMD sunscreens deceptively list zinc oxide as the product’s only active ingredient despite the fact that the products contain substantial levels of less-desirable active chemical ingredients such as octinoxate, octisalate and octocrylene. Advertisem*nts that describe the products as “Mineral Based” on online retail platforms like Amazon are likely to deceive consumers since nearly half of the sunscreens at issue contain a higher concentration of chemical ingredients than zinc oxide, the filing argues.
Want to stay in the loop on class actions that matter to you? Sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletterhere.
The lawsuit alleges that defendants Colgate-Palmolive Company and CP Skin Health Group have used false labels to sell their sunscreens, which reportedly retail for $30 to $40 per bottle, at a premium price, capitalizing on consumers’ willingness to pay more for products that use “physical” or “mineral” sunscreen ingredients. Per the complaint, these sunscreens offer numerous health and environmental advantages over chemical sunscreens.
“As opposed to chemical-based sunscreen ingredients … which are absorbed into the skin, mineral sunscreen ingredients sit on the surface of the skin as an invisible ‘physical’ layer, therefore stopping most UV rays before they have a chance to penetrate the body,” the case explains.
Because active chemical ingredients in sunscreen can penetrate the skin and enter the bloodstream, these products may irritate sensitive or acne-prone skin, cause hormonal disruption and produce dangerous free radicals, the filing argues.
The suit further relays that chemical sunscreen ingredients aredetrimental to reefsandmarine life, such that Hawaii has prohibited the sale of sunscreen products containing octinoxate.
The case claims consumers would not have purchased the products, or would not have paid as much for them, had they known the sunscreen contained significant levels of chemical ingredients.
The nine varieties of EltaMD sunscreens at issue in the lawsuit include:
- EltaMD UV Daily Broad-Spectrum SPF 40 Transparent Zinc Oxide;
- EltaMD UV Daily Broad-Spectrum SPF 40 Transparent Zinc Oxide, Tinted;
- EltaMD UV Clear Broad-Spectrum SPF 46 Transparent Zinc Oxide;
- EltaMD UV Clear Broad-Spectrum SPF 46 Transparent Zinc Oxide, Tinted;
- EltaMD UV Sport Broad-Spectrum SPF 50 Transparent Zinc Oxide;
- EltaMD UV Sheer Broad-Spectrum SPF 50+ Transparent Zinc Oxide;
- EltaMD UV Lotion Broad-Spectrum SPF 30+ Transparent Zinc Oxide;
- EltaMD UV Facial Broad-Spectrum SPF 30+ Transparent Zinc Oxide; and
- EltaMD UV Lip Balm Broad-Spectrum SPF 36 Transparent Zinc Oxide.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who purchased any of the above-listed EltaMD “Transparent Zinc Oxide” sunscreens during theapplicable statute of limitationsperiod.
Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletterhere.
