Convenience is the backbone of every new invention or discovery. With a plethora of tech innovations in almost every field, consumers are being bombarded with apps and ideas that are satiating their every whim and desire.
For big businesses and enterprises, the past few decades have been like a gold mine. Rich in capital and innovation capacity, these players have left no stone unturned in fulfilling their users’ needs and wants. Now, there seems to be a “scientifically proven” or a “guaranteed results” tag for almost everything in the market, from new-age medicines to washing powders!
But, in advertising, there’s a huge distinction between promoting the truth and making false claims. Sadly, many companies have been caught out for peddling substandard products under false promises of quality and efficacy.
For companies that cross the line, it can cost millions and contribute to a damaged reputation. Fraudulent advertising costs the USA around $15 billion a year.
In this blog post, we will shed light on the various instances of businesses taking their customers across all age groups for granted and duping them of trust.
False Marketing and Infants
“Buyer beware” takes on an urgent new meaning when the lives of vulnerable infants are at stake. They do not possess the power of discretion or strong immunity. Anything that gets administered to them needs to be safe and trusted. And, thus, parents resort to the best brands and companies to provide for their newborns.
Established entities with strong branding and marketing wings might make minor changes to their promises and inflate their services. This is simple and beneficial for them because they have a loyal customer base that trusts their products and claims. In this section, we will talk about how two well-known companies took their customers for a ride and made billions in the process.
Similac Baby Formula Lawsuits
Similac infant formula products dominate the lucrative baby nutrition industry. The product packaging promises “360 Total Care” for developing infants through its creamy formulas and probiotic supplements.
According to TorHoerman Law, multiple lawsuits allege that manufacturer Abbott Laboratories exaggerated immunity claims and cognitive benefits of their formulas. They did not disclose potential gastrointestinal risks to premature or underweight babies.
Plaintiffs argue Abbott failed to warn consumers and physicians about research tying ingredients in Similac and related brands to necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC).
This devastating condition impacts premature infants, causing inflammation and death of intestinal tissue. Those afflicted require intensive medical intervention, undergoing procedures like stomach removal and insertion of feeding tubes.
While Abbott maintains confidence in their product safety, they did withdraw certain formulas earlier this year due to contamination issues at one production facility.
If your child, or a loved one’s, was given Similac infant formula and developed Necrotizing Enterocolitis (NEC), you might be entitled to file a Similac lawsuit.
Fisher-Price Rock ‘n Play Sleeper Recalls
The Fisher-Price Rock ‘n Play Sleeper line once ranked among the company’s most popular infant products. Marketed as a soothing inclined seat with rocking motions, print ads and product labels portrayed babies sleeping under taglines like “Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!”
Owing to the increasing number of infant deaths, the company recalled around 4.7 million rock-n-play sleepers in January 2023.
Pediatric and consumer protection groups had warned the company that allowing unrestrained infants to sleep at angles could increase the risk of airway obstruction and suffocation. However, only after escalating incident reports did regulators finally intervene to compel recalls.
In response to wrongful death lawsuits, Fisher-Price defends its safety record despite making design changes allowing restraints and warning labels following initial concerns.
These cases illuminated risks with companies promoting baby products in ways that contradict medical safety guidelines. While redesigns and restrictions came too late, officials hope such cases prevent future lapses endangering infants through false safety assurances.
False Marketing and Adults
These days, profits matter more to brands than their responsibility and integrity toward their customers. It is common for businesses to spend a huge chunk of their money on advertising their products across as many channels as they can.
The US digital marketing industry’s ad spending is touted to reach $300 billion by 2024. In this realm of advertising, no company wants to risk losing its customers, resorting to even unethical means to lure them.
Transvaginal Mesh Injuries
Rushed medical devices can carry unforeseen dangers, especially when manufacturers downplay risks upfront to gain regulatory clearance and clinician buy-in.
Transvaginal mesh products illustrate such risks. Surgical mesh implants are used to treat pelvic prolapse. There was a cloud of doubt over the device’s use because many women reported severe injuries, such as persistent pain, mesh erosion, and organ perforation.
In 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned the production and distribution of meshes in response to widespread indignation. Though warning letters emerged regarding mesh risks, patients claim that the misleading marketing depicted these devices as safe, effective, and less invasive.
Over $8 billion in lawsuit settlements, across 48 states, found companies liable for negligently introducing flawed devices via opacity, deception, and manipulation.
JUUL E-Cigarette Lawsuits
It is expected that when big companies make aggressive health-related claims, they also encourage extensive independent testing. Plaintiffs, in emerging JUUL e-cigarette lawsuits, argue that this did not occur.
Lawsuits contend that JUUL knowingly marketed vaping devices to youth without fully vetting risks, hooking underage non-smokers on nicotine through trendy tech and sweet flavors.
JUUL’s early advertising leveraged the reach of young models and influencers. By styling vaping as a lifestyle choice, legal complaints argue JUUL softened health warnings as addiction concerns took a backseat.
In April 2023, Juul agreed to pay a settlement amount of $462 million in response to claims by six states and Washington D.C.
False Marketing and the Elderly
The rich companies did not even spare this bracket of the population. Listed below are two instances where companies’ marketing gimmicks caused severe health issues for elderly people.
Zantac Lawsuits
To treat chronic heartburn and gastric issues, millions of old people have relied on Zantac (ranitidine) for years. The trust was based on product safety as the direct-to-consumer marketing depicted. However, recent lawsuits challenge this assumption.
Revelations that the antacid medication contains concerning levels of the carcinogen NDMA have sparked an uproar. Plaintiffs argue that the medicine’s marketing failed to warn vulnerable elderly consumers of cancer risks as manufacturers allegedly prioritized profits.
Following news reports, the FDA formally requested withdrawals based on laboratory tests revealing unsafe chemical increases over time, especially when stored at higher than room temperatures. Increased public scrutiny soon extended to manufacturers as well.
With such cases advancing toward trials or settlements, legacy antacid brands face continued scrutiny for how opacity endangered public safety for decades.
As we have seen across cases spanning different demographic groups, exaggerated messages and hidden information in marketing can have devastating impacts on consumers and patients unaware of underlying risks.
When profit concerns override ethical disclosure duties, trusted brands endanger the very groups relying on truthful representations of safety and efficacy.
Rizwan Ali