Gillette Pure Shave Cream Contains Mostly ‘Non-Pure’ Ingredients, Class Action Alleges [DISMISSED]

New to ClassAction.org? Read our Newswire Disclaimer

A proposed class action lawsuit claims Gillette-brand Pure shave cream is falsely advertised in that the majority of the product’s ingredients are not nearly as “pure” as consumers are led to believe.

The 15-page lawsuit contends that statements on the shave cream’s front label—including that the product is “PURE,” “Free from Alcohol, Dyes, Parabens, Sulfates,” “0%” and made “With Aloe”—are misleading given the product contains “non-pure,” and even harmful, chemical ingredients and an insignificant amount of aloe.

According to the suit, the value of the Gillette Pure shave cream is “materially less” than its value as represented by the manufacturer, The Procter & Gamble Company. The case says that consumers would not have purchased the product, or would have paid less for it, had they known the truth about the quality and amounts of the ingredients in the cream.

The lawsuit argues that consumers understand the term “pure,” in the context of cosmetics, to mean that a product contains ingredients that are “not [significantly] altered from [their] original or natural state” and “not harmful in any way.” Per the case, many consumers are willing to pay more for a product marketed as pure given that non-pure ingredients are associated with negative health and environmental effects.

The suit alleges, however, that 10 of the 14 ingredients in the Gillette Pure shave cream are not pure since they’ve been significantly altered from their original or natural state and, in some cases, are toxic or harmful.

After water, the product’s second- and third-most predominant ingredients are palmitic acid and stearic acid, which the case asserts are not pure because they are manufactured from palm oil that is “significantly altered” through a process called saponification, a chemical reaction that converts the oil using an aqueous alkali such as sodium hydroxide.

The next ingredient in the Gillette Pure shave cream, glycerin, is manufactured through hydrogenolysis, another chemical reaction, and likely sourced from biodiesel production, the case relays.

Another, coconut acid, is commercially produced through hydrolysis, a chemical process during which a water molecule is added to a substance and causes it to split, the lawsuit goes on to claim.

With regard to the next ingredient in the shave cream, the lawsuit says potassium hydroxide is not pure because it does not exist in a natural state and is instead produced through electrolysis. Moreover, federal regulations have classified the substance as “a highly toxic and hazardous synthetic compound” that can cause serious injury even after limited exposure, the suit adds.

Triethanolamine similarly does not exist in a natural state, the case says, and has been known to cause skin irritation and inflammation, along with “other harmful effects on the body.”

The suit states that although the next ingredient on the list, fragrance, could theoretically be derived from natural sources, many of the compounds used in fragrances are synthetic.

Phenoxyethanol would not be considered pure, the lawsuit alleges, “because it is toxic to the kidneys, liver, and nervous system.”

Sodium hydroxide and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose are also produced through synthetic processes, according to the complaint.

The lawsuit further alleges that although the front label of the Gillette Pure shave cream claims that the product is made “With Aloe,” aloe is the thirteenth listed ingredient, and exists in a “negligible” amount relative to the other ingredients.

The case looks to represent anyone in Illinois, Wyoming, Kansas, Kentucky, West Virginia, Iowa, Utah and Alaska who purchased the Gillette Pure shave cream within the applicable statute of limitations period.

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