Class Action Says ‘Natural’ Claim on Senokot Laxative, Supplement Products Misleads Consumers

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action claims consumers have been misled by Avrio Health’s representations that its Senokot products are “natural” when the laxatives and supplements contain non-natural, synthetic ingredients.

According to the suit, the defendant’s claim that its laxatives and dietary supplements are “natural” is “false, deceptive and misleading” given the products contain synthetic substances such as magnesium stearate, silicon dioxide, dicalcium phosphate, sodium benzoate, stearic acid, titanium dioxide and maltodextrin.

The lawsuit alleges consumers have paid a premium price for the following products based on Avrio’s false representations:

• Senokot Standardized Senna Concentrate Regular Strength;
• Senokot-S Standardized Senna Concentrate Docusate Sodium Dual Action;
• Senokot Standardized Senna Concentrate Extra Strength;
• Senokot Digestive Support Daily Kiwi Balance Dietary Supplement; and
• Senokot Digestive Support Ginger Care Dietary Supplement.

Senokot products contain substances a reasonable consumer would not consider to be “natural,” the suit claims. According to guidance issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, a natural substance is one that was derived from a natural source and not altered (other than by  naturally occurring biological processes such as composting, fermenting, enzymatic digestion, heating or burning) in a manner that caused it to be chemically or structurally different from how it occurs naturally.

The lawsuit argues consumers lack the meaningful ability to test or verify whether the ingredients in Senokot products are natural and would only be able to determine that some are synthetic through a scientific investigation. Even though the ingredients are listed on the products’ packaging, consumers could not understand, nor are expected to understand, that the ingredients are not natural, the suit avers.

Per the case, consumers relied “to their detriment” on the defendant’s deceptive representations as the products they purchased were worth less than what they paid.

“Had Defendant not made the false, misleading, and deceptive representations and omissions, Plaintiff and the Class members would not have been willing to pay the same amount for the Products they purchased,” the complaint declares.

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