Enfagrow Class Action: Are Toddler Drinks Misleading and Harmful?

Imagine wanting the best for your toddler's health, only to discover you might be unknowingly putting them at risk. That's the worry for three California parents – Chelsea Garland, Estelita Rey, and Zachary Williams – who just filed a class action lawsuit against Mead Johnson & Company, the maker of popular toddler drinks Enfagrow Premium Toddler Nutritional Drink and Enfagrow NeuroPro Toddler Nutritional Drink. 

They allege Enfagrow's marketing and ingredients are misleading and potentially harmful to young children.

Parents Upset Over Enfagrow Label Claims

The lawsuit takes aim at the promises plastered across Enfagrow labels. Phrases like "22 Nutrients to help support growth," "Immune Health Dual Prebiotics & Vitamins," and "supports Brain Development Omega-3 DHA & Iron" sound reassuring to parents. But the lawsuit argues these claims are actually deceptive.

According to the complaint, these claims violate FDA regulations that protect young children. Children under two have specific dietary needs. They need nutrient-rich foods to fuel their rapid growth, and they're still developing healthy eating habits. The lawsuit argues that Enfagrow drinks don't necessarily promote these goals. 

On top of that, the lawsuit says the claims mislead parents into thinking the drinks offer unique health benefits that may not be backed by science. For example, the lawsuit mentions the American Academy of Pediatrics, which advises that specialty toddler formulas are usually unnecessary. It also says claims about brain development and immunity could make parents think Enfagrow is healthier than cow's milk, which may not be true.

Lawsuit Questions Added Sugars and Unneeded Extras in Enfagrow Drinks

Beyond the labeling issues, the lawsuit also calls out the nutritional content of the Enfagrow drinks themselves. Many parents are already concerned about added sugars in their children's diets, and the lawsuit takes aim at Enfagrow for including them specifically. These added sugars can increase a child's risk of obesity and tooth decay.

The complaint further raises concerns about certain vitamins and minerals in the drinks, such as Vitamin C and zinc sulfate. The parents argue there's no real scientific need for these extra ingredients in a toddler's diet, and they could even be harmful in high doses.

“There is no recognition by the scientific community that there is a dietary insufficiency in Vitamin C or zinc,” the lawsuit states.

Marketing Strategy Accused of Preying on Parents' Worries

Shifting focus to the marketing strategy, the lawsuit criticizes how Enfagrow promotes its products. It alleges the companies exploit parents' anxieties about their children's health. 

By suggesting the drinks can boost immunity or enhance brain development, the lawsuit claims Enfagrow misrepresents the product and leads parents to pay a premium price for something that might not deliver on its promises.

“These claims deceive and mislead reasonable consumers into believing that the Products provide physical health benefits for their child when in fact, the Products are harmful for children under two both nutritionally and developmentally,” the proposed class action lawsuit argues.

In the Enfagrow baby food class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs are seeking to represent a class of California consumers who purchased Enfagrow toddler drinks between 2021 and the present. They are asking for an order temporarily and permanently enjoining Mead Johnson from continuing the alleged unlawful, deceptive, fraudulent, and unfair business practices, along with compensatory, exemplary, and statutory damages.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Garland et al. v. Mead Johnson & Company, LLC et al.
• Case Number: 3:24-cv-01168
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Tarek H. Zohdy, Cody R. Padgett, Laura E. Goolsby, and Nathan N. Kiyam (Capstone Law APC)