RiseWell Kids Toothpaste Class Action: Does It Contain Toxic PFAS?

RiseWell Kids Mineral Toothpaste touts itself as being natural, chemical free, and safe for children to swallow during toothbrushing, but a new lawsuit is throwing all those claims into question.

Parents have filed a proposed class action lawsuit against the manufacturer accusing it of allowing high levels of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as “PFAS,” in the children’s toothpaste, posing serious health risks to youngsters.

Parents Say RiseWell Kids Toothpaste Contains Toxic PFAS

Mothers Alana Watkins and Jo Ann Accardi filed the lawsuit against Illuminati Labs LLC and RiseWell LLC accusing the companies of a range of consumer law violations around the marketing and sale of the toothpaste. 

Both parents purchased RiseWell Kids Mineral Toothpaste for their children as a result of the companies’ marketing, they said, and they understood the health claims to mean the toothpaste was free from harmful toxins and safe for children to swallow. Had they known the toothpaste allegedly contained PFAS, they say they would have never bought it.

They say they would still like to buy RiseWell natural toothpaste for their children, but until the company is made to fix its marketing they are “further likely to be repeatedly misled by Defendants’ conduct” and are “unable to make informed decisions” about natural toothpaste in the future. 

Lawsuit Highlights Dangers of "Forever Chemicals" in Toothpaste

Man-made PFAS are known as forever chemicals because, as the lawsuit explains, they break down slowly, if at all. Because PFAS chemicals don’t break down quickly, and are in a range of household and cosmetic items, they can build up in the body through repeated exposure and they have been linked to a range of health issues including increased cholesterol, changes in the body’s hormones and immune system, decreased fertility, and increased risk of certain cancers, the lawsuit states.

The mothers argue in the lawsuit that toothpaste is a particularly effective method to introduce PFAS into the body, with the mouth and oral lining tissue being efficient entry points for both children and adults. They allege that no reasonable consumer would expect the product, which was marketed prominently as a safe to swallow, completely natural, toxic-free toothpaste, to contain harmful PFAS chemicals. 

RiseWell Toothpaste Lawsuit Joins Growing Trend of PFAS Litigation

With the increase in awareness around the dangers and pervasiveness of PFAS, consumers are demanding companies act more responsibly with the chemicals and increase testing into their products. Some consumers are even testing themselves to find out if their household items are truly safe to use, and at times those tests result in legal action. 

Costco and Nice-Pak Products were just hit with a lawsuit alleging their Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes, marketed as being made from naturally derived products, contain unsafe levels of PFAS after parents had scientists conduct tests on the wipes in a government approved lab. 

In another case, a California mom filed a class action lawsuit against Coterie Baby, a popular eco-friendly diaper company, alleging deceptive marketing, accusing Coterie Baby of falsely advertising its diapers as "PFAS-free" despite containing these potentially harmful chemicals. 

In non-baby related products, BIC USA has been accused in a new class action lawsuit of failing to disclose the presence of PFAS in its razors showing the ubiquitous nature of the issue!

In order to tackle the growing problem, state and federal governments are taking action. In April 2024, the U.S. EPA established the first national drinking water standard for PFAS, meanwhile eleven states have banned the intentional use of PFAS in food packaging as of May 2024. Maine has a law prohibiting the sale of products with intentionally added PFAS, effective January 1, 2032.

In the RiseWell Kids Toothpaste PFAS class action lawsuit, the parents are suing the toothpaste manufacturers on behalf of California consumers for alleged violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, and False Advertising Law; New York General Business Law; fraud; fraudulent omission or concealment; breach of express warranty; negligent misrepresentation; and unjust enrichment. They’re seeking injunctive relief, damages, and fees and costs. 

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Watkins, et al. v. Illuminati Labs LLC, et al.
• Case Number: 5:24-cv-03529 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorney:

• L. Timothy Fisher, Joshua R. Wilner, and Joshua B. Glatt  (Bursor & Fisher PA)