
Colgate-Palmolive
TINA.org found Colgate-Palmolive deceptively marketing its Colgate and Tom’s of Maine toothpaste tubes as “recyclable” despite not being recycled in reality.
February 2016: The appeal was voluntarily dismissed, the reasons for which have not been disclosed.
December 2015: An objector filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the final approval of the settlement.
November 2015: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement.
June 2015: A federal judge preliminarily approved a settlement of a class-action lawsuit against Colgate-Palmolive Company. The complaint, which was amended in May 2015, alleges that Colgate misleadingly markets Softsoap Antibacterial soaps as more effective at killing and eliminating germs than washing with other liquid hand soaps when such claims are not true. According to the settlement terms, the company agreed, among other things, to stop making certain statements (e.g., “Goodbye Germs – Hello World”) and not to describe the product as 99% effective without also disclosing the testing methods. The settlement does not provide the class members with any monetary relief (i.e., refunds). A final fairness hearing is scheduled for September 28, 2015. (In Re Colgate-Palmolive Softsoap Antibacterial Handsoap Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 12-md-02320, D. NH.)
TINA.org found Colgate-Palmolive deceptively marketing its Colgate and Tom’s of Maine toothpaste tubes as “recyclable” despite not being recycled in reality.
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain, or are at risk of containing, toxic heavy metals, including lead and mercury
Allegations: Falsely marketing products as safe for children when the fluoride in them is not safe for children to swallow
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain, or are at risk of containing, lead and arsenic
Allegations: Marketing products as safe, healthy, natural, and effective
Allegations: Deceptively marketing candy- and fruit-flavored mouth rinses as safe for children when fluoride mouth rinses are not safe for children younger than 6 years old
Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain a bacteria and may increase the risk of contracting invasive infections
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing products as safe and gentle whitening toothpastes when charcoal is abrasive to enamel and gums
Allegations: Falsely advertising toothpaste tubes as recyclable
Allegations: False natural claims
Allegations: False natural claims
Allegations: Falsely marketing toothpaste as “antiplaque” when none of the ingredients reduce, prevent or remove plaque
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing sunscreens as if the mineral ingredient zinc oxide is the only active ingredient
Allegations: Falsely advertising toothpastes as safe when charcoal is abrasive and causes damage to enamel and gums
Allegations: Failing to disclose products contain the carcinogen benzene
Allegations: False natural claims
Allegations: Deceptively using slack-filled containers
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that the antiperspirants fight yellow stains and do not leave white marks when an ingredient in them causes both
Allegations: Falsely advertising that antiperspirants fight yellow stains and white marks when the active ingredient causes both
The bottom line? Toothpaste tubes aren’t generally getting recycled.
These definitions are a joke.
See how you stack up.
Some of the worst ads TINA.org covered this year.
TINA.org has tracked more than 150 lawsuits alleging greenwashing.