![](https://truthinadvertising.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/One-A-Day.jpg)
One A Day VitaCraves Gummies
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as if one gummy provides consumers’ with their requisite daily nutrients
In April 2015, a federal judge granted final approval of a $500,000 settlement of a false advertising class-action lawsuit against Bayer. The complaint, which was originally filed in 2008, alleged that Bayer misleadingly marketed its “One-A-Day WeightSmart” dietary supplements as having the ability to, among other things, increase metabolism, prevent weight gain, and help promote weight maintenance when, in reality, such claims are not true. According to the settlement terms, class members with proof of purchase may receive a full refund (for a maximum refund of $250) and class members without proof of purchase may receive a $15 refund. The marketing for “One-A-Day WeightSmart” will remain the same as the company has not agreed to make any changes as a result of this lawsuit. (Carrera et al v. Bayer Corporation and Bayer HealthCare, LLC, Case No. 08-cv-04716, D. NJ.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits filed against Bayer and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding weight-loss products and TINA.org’s coverage of them, click here.
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as if one gummy provides consumers’ with their requisite daily nutrients
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain dangerously high levels of the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as if the number of gummies in one bottle equals the number of daily servings
False advertising class-action lawsuits filed regarding the marketing of Seresto flea and tick collars
Allegations: Misleadingly claiming that products contain honey and lemon zest when the ingredients list reveals they don’t contain either Misleadingly marketing products as being for “severe cold & flu” when…
Allegations: Falsely marketing that phenylephrine products relieve nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing the products treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing that products combat congestion and other sinus issues
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat congestion
Allegations: Falsely marketing that phenylephrine products treat congestion and other cold and flu symptoms
Allegations: Falsely marketing that medicines treat nasal congestion
Allegations: Failing to disclose products contain the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: Failing to disclose sunscreens contain the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: False natural claims
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing the gummies as if one chewable provides the nutrients represented on the product label without adequately disclosing that the serving size is two gummies
Allegations: False natural claims
Allegations: Falsely marketing products as “non-drowsy” when the active ingredient causes drowsiness
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing sunscreens as mineral-based when they often contain more chemical active ingredients than mineral active ingredients
Allegations: Marketing sunscreens as “safe and gentle on a baby’s skin” when they contain the carcinogen benzophenone
Allegations: Falsely representing that the active ingredient “targets an enzyme found in plants but not people or pets”
Allegations: Failing to warn consumers of the health risks associated with using the product due to its active ingredient
Allegations: Failing to warn consumers that ingredients may cause cancer
Allegations: Failing to warn consumers of the health risks associated with using the product due to its active ingredient (glyphosate)
Allegations: Falsely marketing that multivitamins provide various health benefits
August 2019: The Eight Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision to approve the settlement. June 2018: Two objectors (Migliaccio and Sweeney) filed Notices of Appeal regarding the…
May 2020: A federal judge granted preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. A final fairness hearing is scheduled for November 9, 2020. For more information, go to https://roundupwgksettlement.com. March 2020:…
December 2019: This case was transferred to a court in California to be heard with other similar cases in a multidistrict litigation. (In Re: Roundup Products Liability Litigation, MDL No.…
In September 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Costco for allegedly misleadingly selling Roundup® without adequately warning consumers that the herbicide contains the alleged carcinogen glyphosate and is dangerous.…
September 2019: This case was transferred from state court to federal court. (Case No. 19-cv-81231, S. D. FL.) August 2019: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Target for allegedly failing…
In August 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Lowe’s for allegedly deceptively marketing Roundup by failing to properly warn consumers that it contains the alleged carcinogen glyphosate and is…
In August 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Home Depot for allegedly deceptively marketing Roundup® without adequately warning consumers that it contains the alleged carcinogen glyphosate and is dangerous.…
March 2019: A federal judge denied the company’s motion to dismiss. To read the full decision, click here. November 2017: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against Bayer Healthcare…
In July 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Monsanto Company for allegedly misleadingly marketing Roundup® as safe when, according to the complaint, an ingredient in the weed killer (glyphosate)…
In May 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Monsanto Company regarding its crop system composed of Monsanto’s seeds and various herbicides – including Monsanto’s Xtendimax, BASF’s Engenia, and DuPont’s…
August 2017: This case was transferred to a court in Missouri where a proposed nationwide class settlement agreement would resolve this case along with another related case, Rawa v. Monsanto.…
August 2016: This lawsuit was voluntarily dismissed because the parties entered a confidential settlement agreement. December 2014: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Bayer for allegedly falsely advertising the Flintstones…
In April 2017, two class-action lawsuits were filed against Monsanto Company for allegedly falsely marketing Roundup® “Garden Weeds” Weed & Grass Killer products as targeting an enzyme “found in plants…
May 2015: The named plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed this action When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled.. The reasons have not been…
In February 2016, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Bayer Consumer Health for allegedly deceptively marketing Dr. Scholl’s “Custom Fit Orthotic” inserts. The complaint alleges that the company deceptively markets…
DOJ alleges Bayer violated previous court order by making unsupported claims about product.
Are FTC settlements just a cost of doing business?