At issue in this case is TruBlend Pressed Powder, a kind of cosmetics made by CoverGirl Cosmetics, which is owned by Coty, Inc. The complaint for this class action sues these two companies, alleging that the powder is “unfit for its intended use” because it contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of chemicals that are harmful to human beings.
The class for this action is all persons in the US who bought the product.
PFAS are harmful, and can accumulate both in human beings and in the environment. The complaint quotes a scientific paper as saying, “PFAS have been shown to have a number of toxicological effects in laboratory studies and have been associated with thyroid disorders, immunotoxic effects, and various cancers in epidemiology studies.”
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) warns about “a host of health effects associated with PFAS exposure, including cancer, liver damage, decreased fertility, and increased risk of asthma and thyroid disease.”
The companies represent that the powder product is “sustainable” and “safe,” but the complaint claims this is not true.
It claims that “independent research conducted by Toxin Free USA determined that the Product contains 6,242 parts per million (ppm) of fluorine, and that ‘[s]ubsequent testing revealed that all 6,242 ppm of the fluorine detected was organic fluorine; organic fluorine results identify a quantity of organofluorine compounds (e.g., PFAS) and excludes the possibility that fluorine may be present from other or natural sources.”
How much is 6,242 ppm? The complaint claims, “As a point of reference, the current EPA health advisory limit for safe consumption[] is just 70 nanograms per liter. To put this in perspective, 1 part per million is the equivalent of 1,000,000 nanograms per liter.” This means, the complaint claims, that “use of the Product would expose a consumer to PFAS at levels that are several order of magnitude higher than one would receive from drinking a liter of water that contains PFAS at the level considered safe by the EPA.”
The complaint also finds the packaging concerning, because it suggest that consumers should “apply throughout the day,” that the product is “suitable for sensitive skin” and “dermatologically tested,” which all suggest to customers that the product is safe for repeated use.
The powder product is also meant to be applied directly to the face, the complaint says, “despite research that shows that exposure near the eyes and mouth increases the likelihood and hence risk of absorption and ingestion.” The complaint reproduces a photo of the usage of the product that shows it being applied directly around the eyes.
The complaint alleges that the product is not safe and poses a health risk to those who use it, but that the companies do not at any point warn customers about this.
Article Type: LawsuitTopic: Consumer
Most Recent Case Event
CoverGirl TruBlend Pressed Powder PFAS Content Complaint
March 25, 2022
At issue in this case is TruBlend Pressed Powder, a kind of cosmetics made by CoverGirl Cosmetics, which is owned by Coty, Inc. The complaint for this class action sues these two companies, alleging that the powder is “unfit for its intended use” because it contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of chemicals that are harmful to human beings.
CoverGirl TruBlend Pressed Powder PFAS Content ComplaintCase Event History
CoverGirl TruBlend Pressed Powder PFAS Content Complaint
March 25, 2022
At issue in this case is TruBlend Pressed Powder, a kind of cosmetics made by CoverGirl Cosmetics, which is owned by Coty, Inc. The complaint for this class action sues these two companies, alleging that the powder is “unfit for its intended use” because it contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a group of chemicals that are harmful to human beings.
CoverGirl TruBlend Pressed Powder PFAS Content Complaint