Class Action Challenges Protein Claims for PB&J Uncrustables, Other Smucker’s Products

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

Unbeknownst to consumers, Peanut Butter & Strawberry Uncrustables, JIF Peanut Butter, Adams Peanut Butter, Sahale Snacks, Laura Scudders and other Smucker’s items do not deliver the amount of protein stated on product labels, a proposed class action claims.

The 25-page lawsuit, using Smucker’s Peanut Butter & Strawberry Uncrustables as an example, alleges that although the product’s label relays that the snack provides “6g Protein,” amino acid content testing has revealed it contains only five grams of protein, or roughly 20 percent less than consumers are led to believe. Moreover, the case contends that the quality of protein defendant J.M. Smucker Company uses in Uncrustables and other products is of “low biological value to humans,” and when the peanut-derived protein content is adjusted based on FDA guidelines, Uncrustables provide “even less protein per serving than amino acid content testing alone reveals,” according to the complaint.

All told, the adjusted protein content in Uncrustables, for example, is not the advertised 6 grams, but in truth only 2.5 grams, an overstatement of approximately 140 percent, the lawsuit alleges, calling Smucker’s protein content claims “false, misleading, and intended to induce consumers to purchase the Products at a premium price, while ultimately failing to meet consumer expectations.” 

According to the lawsuit, the National Academy of Medicine recommends that adults get a minimum of .8 grams of protein for every kilogram of body weight per day, or just over seven grams of protein for every 20 pounds of body weight. For a 140-pound person, the case says, that means the individual should consume around 50 grams of protein per day. Younger age groups, according to the suit, should consume anywhere from 13 to 34 grams of protein per day depending on age. 

In addition to protein quantity, quality is also critical in that some proteins cannot be fully digested or utilized, the case continues, emphasizing that nutrition labeling is important so as to prevent consumers from being misled when given information on only the amount of protein in a product. 

According to the complaint, Smucker’s uses plant-based proteins in its products. Plant-based proteins, as opposed to animal-based proteins, rarely contain all nine essential amino acids, and peanut proteins, such as those used by Smucker’s, are “not fully digested by humans.” The nine essential amino acids can only be supplied by diet, the case relays, and high-quality proteins have an overall greater effect on nutrition given they’re fully digestible. 

“Accordingly, Defendant’s use of low quality proteins, even in combination with some higher quality proteins, means they actually provide far less protein to humans than the Product labels claim, or that amino acid content testing without correcting for digestibility shows,” the lawsuit claims. 

Per the suit, the benchmark used in adjusting for protein quality is based on the FDA’s “Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score” (PDCAAS). The case says peanuts, from which the protein is derived in the Smucker’s products at issue, typically have a PDCAAS score of 0.5, meaning “only 50% of the protein from those sources will be digested and bioavailable to humans.”

The suit stresses that consumers lack the meaningful ability to test or independently verify the truthfulness of Smucker’s protein content claims, especially at the point of sale. The defendant’s labeling of the products, combined with the average consumer’s lack of specialized knowledge in determining a product’s PDCAAS as far as protein quality, gives a buyer “no reason to suspect that Defendant’s representations on the packages were false,” according to the case. The complaint posits that Smucker’s protein claims intend to give the company a competitive edge over products that do not include “misleading protein representations on product labels.” 

The case looks to represent all persons in California who bought any of the products listed below between August 20, 2017 and the present.

Get class action lawsuit news sent to your inbox – sign up for ClassAction.org’s free weekly newsletter here.