The Legal Examiner Affiliate Network The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner search instagram avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner The Legal Examiner
Skip to main content

“Hell hath no fury…” like a lady whose cholesterol may not have changed one iota after consuming several $12-bottles’ worth of Vitamin E pills. The label on said pills read, “naturally contributes to cardiovascular health by helping to protect LDL cholesterol from oxidation which may cause cellular damage.”

Walgreen’s is being sued over the claims on the supplement’s label by Andrea Trujillo of Bakersfield, California, who says clinical studies show Vitamin E supplements do not work as advertised by Walgreen’s. Last Friday, a complaint was filed on Ms. Trujillo’s behalf in a Chicago, Illinois, federal court. The suit claims the product “did not work” period, even when used as directed.

Thus far, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not evaluated the claim on the label, but the National Institutes of Health (NIH – also part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services) supports the fact that Vitamin E’s antioxidant function keeps the body’s cells from free-radical damage which is believed to contribute to cardiovascular disease and cancer.

Who is correct? Perhaps this lawsuit will shed some light on the subject. I wish I knew more about Vitamin E; I always thought it was good for me. What next, fish oil doesn't work?

Comments for this article are closed.