Lawsuit Filed Regarding Hydroxycut Supplements

Columbus, OHA class action lawsuit has been filed against the maker of Hydroxycut supplements following the Hydroxycut recall. The lawsuit alleges that the dietary supplements are linked to Hydroxycut liver damage. Meanwhile, as the news about the Hydroxycut side effects spreads, more people report that they believe they were affected by the supplements.

One story, reported by the Los Angeles Times, recounts the experiences of Robert Tropea, a soldier who took Hydroxycut for 3 months in 2007. Tropea says he suffered mysterious ailments after taking Hydroxycut, but did not realize that his problems could be linked to the dietary supplements. According to the article, in July 2007, Tropea experienced extreme muscle ache following a physical training session and noticed that his urine was black. A medical test showed his creatine kinase levels were 3,000 above the normal limit and he was diagnosed with rhabdomyolysis, which occurs when muscle fibers break down and are released into the blood stream, potentially resulting in liver and kidney damage.

Tropea says in the article he believed dietary supplements are regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), or some other governmental organization, so he thought Hydroxycut was safe to take. In fact, he was so convinced that the dietary supplements were harmless, he did not tell his doctors that he had taken Hydroxycut prior to his hospitalization.

The truth is that dietary supplements are not necessarily harmless. Anything that a person ingests runs the risk of causing an adverse reaction, no matter how "natural" the ingredients. After all, many dietary supplements are advertised to have an effect on the body: they are marketed as helping with weight loss, speeding up a metabolism or decreasing a person's appetite. Anything that can have a positive effect on a person's body could potentially have a negative effect as well.

Furthermore, Under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), the onus is on the supplement's manufacturer to ensure that it is safe for consumers to take. The company is meant to rely on evidence in ensuring the supplement is safe, but does not have to provide evidence to the FDA unless the supplement in question contains an "entirely new dietary ingredient."

Dietary supplements like Hydroxycut are not subjected to FDA approval or denial because they contain only dietary ingredients such as minerals, vitamins and herbal extracts and they do not claim to treat diseases. In such cases, the FDA can only take action against a dietary supplement when regulators have adequate evidence to prove that it poses a serious risk to consumers. Then the FDA can ban the supplement's sale—but by that point people may have already been harmed by the supplement.

In the case of Hydroxycut, the recall was announced after the FDA linked the product to 23 known cases of liver damage—which included 1 death—46 reports of cardiovascular events and 4 reports of seizures. While that number may seem small relative to the number of people who use Hydroxycut, consider that there are likely more people out there like Tropea, who may have suffered an adverse reaction but did not know it could be linked to Hydroxycut.

Consider also that the death was not reported to the FDA until 2 years after it occurred—making it entirely possible that there are more deaths or adverse reactions out there that have not yet been reported or have not been linked to Hydroxycut.

Tropea is reportedly part of a group of plaintiffs in a planned lawsuit against Iovate Health Sciences Inc., maker of Hydroxycut. So far, according to Consumer Affairs, 2 lawsuits have been filed against the company: 1 in Tennessee and 1 in Canada. The lawsuits allege that Iovate failed to warn the public about the dangers of Hydroxycut and/or did not take proper precautions to protect consumers.

The Tennessee lawsuit was filed on May 20 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee on behalf of anyone who purchased a Hydroxycut product. The lawsuit alleges negligence, breach of warranties, fraud and failure to warn.