Recently, according to Top Class Actions, a website that provides information on class-action lawsuits and settlements in the United States, a consumer named Melissa Gonick filed a class-action lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., the parent company of the Neutrogena brand, in the federal court of New York. The lawsuit alleges that the brand falsely labeled its shampoo products as being free of preservatives. So, what exactly is the situation here?
Claiming “preservative-free,” Neutrogena faces class-action lawsuit
According to a report by Top Class Actions, in this class-action lawsuit against the Neutrogena brand, plaintiff Melissa Gonick accuses Neutrogena T/Sal Therapeutic Shampoo of falsely claiming to be “preservative-free.” However, the product actually contains citric acid (a preservative), which is clearly listed in its inactive ingredient list. The lawsuit documents reveal that citric acid is commonly added as an acidifier to extend the shelf life of cosmetics and skincare products.
“The intent of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. is not relevant because citric acid serves as a preservative in the product, even if it is added to perform different product functions,” stated Melissa Gonick in the lawsuit. “I would not have purchased Neutrogena T/Sal Therapeutic Shampoo if I knew that Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. falsely advertised the product as preservative-free.”
Melissa Gonick believes that “Neutrogena T/Sal Therapeutic Shampoo capitalizes on consumers’ preference for preservative-free products, and the statement ‘preservative-free’ on the product packaging is intended to ‘induce’ health-conscious buyers to purchase the shampoo and ‘unfairly profit from their deceptive conduct.'” As a result, Melissa Gonick has filed a class-action lawsuit against Neutrogena on behalf of herself and other consumers who purchased Neutrogena T/Sal Therapeutic Shampoo.
The Top Class Actions report further states that in this class-action lawsuit against the Neutrogena brand, the plaintiff primarily alleges violations of New York General Business Law, breach of express warranty, and unjust enrichment, seeking compensation from the company. The report also mentions that in 2023, a federal judge in the United States dismissed a class-action lawsuit that claimed Johnson & Johnson’s Aveeno Baby products were the same as the adult version but were falsely marketed as specifically made for infants.
According to publicly available information, citric acid is an important organic acid found widely in fruits such as lemons, citrus fruits, and in the skeletons, muscles, and blood of animals. In 1784, Swedish chemist Carl Wilhelm Scheele isolated citric acid by crystallization from lemon juice. With improvements in production methods, the production and consumption of citric acid have increased over the years, making it a major bulk chemical used extensively in food, soft drinks, confectionery, and skincare products.
In the cosmetics industry, citric acid belongs to the family of α-hydroxy acids (or AHAs) and is primarily used for exfoliation in beauty products. It also acts as an antimicrobial agent and pH adjuster. According to public reports, in 2016, the Voluntary Cosmetic Registration Program (VCRP) of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) stated that citric acid is used in nearly all categories of cosmetics, with over 10,000 different applications.
Playing it close to the line, “Real preservative is salicylic acid”
It is worth mentioning that China’s “Cosmetic Safety Technical Specification (2015 Edition)” includes 51 approved preservatives, but citric acid is not among them. In the European Union’s Cosmetic Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009, the list of cosmetic preservatives (Appendix V) also does not include citric acid. Additionally, it is understood that the US FDA does not have a list-based management system for preservatives in cosmetics, only including two preservatives, hexachlorophene and mercury compounds.
“Whether citric acid is considered a preservative depends on the true purpose of its addition in the formula,” said several industry insiders. Pan Guangle, the R&D manager of Guangdong Baibo Biotechnology Co., told CHAILEEDO, “If the true purpose of adding citric acid in the product is to inhibit bacterial growth, then the advertising is misleading. However, if citric acid is only used to adjust the acidity or facilitate the dissolution of certain ingredients, then it is not misleading.”
A senior industry insider in the cosmetics industry stated, “In shampoo, for citric acid to function as a preservative, the pH value of the product must be adjusted to below 4 to have a certain inhibitory effect on microbial growth. Additionally, relying solely on citric acid for preservation efficacy is not very effective.”
CHAILEEDO found that the Neutrogena T-Sal Salicylic Acid Shampoo is not currently available on mainstream e-commerce platforms in China. However, it is sold on the official Neutrogena website, Amazon, and Walmart’s e-commerce platforms. Looking at the cosmetic ingredients listed on the packaging of this product, it contains 3% salicylic acid as the active ingredient, and it does indeed include citric acid and sodium citrate among the inactive ingredients.
A hair care brand manager in Shanghai told CHAILEEDO, “The ingredient that truly acts as a preservative in Neutrogena T-Sal Salicylic Acid Shampoo is salicylic acid, while citric acid and sodium citrate are used as pH buffering agents in the formula.”
It is understood that China’s “Cosmetic Safety Technical Specification” (2015 Edition) has two regulations regarding the use of salicylic acid. One regulation designates it as a restricted component in cosmetics, with a maximum allowed concentration of 2.0% in leave-on and rinse-off skin products, and 3.0% in rinse-off hair products. The other regulation designates salicylic acid and its salts as approved preservatives in cosmetics, with a maximum allowed concentration of 0.5% (as acid) in the product.
Meanwhile, the European Union’s “Cosmetic Regulation 1223/2009” also has two regulations regarding the use of salicylic acid. Appendix III specifies that when salicylic acid is used as a restricted component, it is limited to 3.0% in rinse-off hair products. Additionally, when salicylic acid is used as a preservative, it is limited to 0.5% (as salicylic acid).
Li Jincong, the founder of the Cosmetic Prohibited Words Network, told CHAILEEDO, “In fact, whether salicylic acid is used as a restricted substance or as a preservative, it does not change the fact that salicylic acid has a preservative effect. In Neutrogena T-Sal Salicylic Acid Shampoo, although the 3% salicylic acid is not added for its preservative properties, the main ingredient that provides the preservative effect is still salicylic acid. At the same time, salicylic acid is also an ingredient in the preservative list, so Neutrogena is playing it close to the line.”
As for why citric acid is targeted in this class-action lawsuit instead of salicylic acid, Pan Guangle believes, “This is likely due to the consumer’s unfamiliarity with the formulation of cosmetics. In reality, the overall demand direction is correct, which is that the product formula actually contains ingredients that serve as preservatives but is advertised as ‘preservative-free’.” He further stated.
“It is safe to use preservatives within the specified range”
As we all know, preservatives added to cosmetics are ingredients that are primarily used to prevent or delay the growth of microorganisms and to prevent the deterioration or spoilage of cosmetics. However, while preservatives inhibit microbial growth, they can also irritate the skin and cause skin sensitivity, which has led to concerns among many consumers.
In fact, there is no shortage of popular science information regarding cosmetic preservatives. An article titled “Are Preservatives in Cosmetics a Safety Risk?” published on the official website of the National Medical Products Administration in October 2017 pointed out that preservatives have no benefits for the skin and are common factors that cause allergic reactions and other irritant reactions in cosmetics. However, if cosmetics do not contain preservatives, it would pose greater safety risks. Furthermore, cosmetic manufacturers find it difficult to completely avoid the use of preservatives.
“There are two main aspects to cosmetics without preservatives. One is not adding any preservative ingredients to the formula, and the other is adding preservative ingredients outside the list of cosmetic preservatives.” Pan Guangle stated that the former mainly includes disposable products such as single-use items, which have strict control requirements in production workshops. The latter does not require high environmental requirements for production workshops, and most of the cosmetics advertised as preservative-free on the market fall into this category.
Li Jincong pointed out, “Cosmetics are not products for immediate use, and it is safe to use preservatives in a reasonable and regulated manner. In addition, the absence of preservatives in cosmetics does not necessarily indicate better quality. Many products with no preservative capabilities pose higher risks when bacteria exceed the standard, and consumers cannot judge this with the naked eye.”
When searching for “preservative-free” on Xiaohongshu (a Chinese social media platform), CHAILEEDO found numerous promotional phrases such as “preservative-free cosmetics,” “preservative-free masks,” and “preservative-free creams.” In addition, there are many cosmetics claiming to be “naturally without added preservatives” on major e-commerce platforms. According to publicly available data, in recent years, the number of new products claiming to be preservative-free in the Chinese skincare market has increased from 428 in 2019 to 488 in 2021.
“Claims of being ‘preservative-free’ may undermine other products that contain preservatives. Although it may be compliant and legal, we do not advocate this behavior,” said Li Jincong. Currently, laws and regulations have not provided clear guidelines for claims of being “preservative-free.” It is recommended that regulatory authorities strengthen management, such as specifying under what conditions claims of being “preservative-free” are allowed and what additional labeling is required.
“There is still great potential for the market share of truly preservative-free cosmetics. We hope to create an orderly market by promoting the emergence of better technologies and balancing the regulatory bodies, testing entities, manufacturers, retailers, and consumers,” said the aforementioned senior industry insider in the cosmetics industry.
