WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. (Legal Newsline) — A woman alleges a feminine vaginal rinse caused her to suffer a reaction and that the rinse is harmful to women's health.
Chandra Campbell filed a class action complaint April 25 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against pH-D Feminine Health LLC alleging violation of New York General Business Law and other claims.
Campbell says she purchased the defendant's Health Boric Acid Instant Vaginal Odor Rinse in May 2022. She claims that the defendant represented on the product label that the rinse is suitable for vaginal use and for vaginal cleansing.
She says the defendant's claim that a woman should use the product in her vagina is false and that the medical community is "adamant" that vaginal cleanses and other fluids are harmful to women's health.
The complaint goes on to describe the anatomy of the vagina and why a rinse would be harmful to it.
"Douching can lead to an array of health issues," the lawsuit says. "For instance, women who douche on a weekly basis are five times more likely to develop bacterial vaginosis than women who do not douche.
"Women who douche also have a higher risk of getting pelvic inflammatory disease because douching causes harmful changes in the healthy bacteria that live in the vagina. Douching can also cause pregnancy problems, such as ectopic pregnancy, and infertility."
Campbell further claims that the defendant's claims are misleading and false and that consumers would not have purchased the product or would have paid substantially less for the product if they knew the claims are false. She alleges that after using the defendant's vaginal rinse, she experienced irritation and was directed by her gynecologist to stop.
Campbell and the class seek monetary relief of more than $5 million, interest, trial by jury and all other just relief. They are represented by Philip Fraietta and Max Roberts of Bursor & Bursor in New York City and Brittany Scott and Emily Horne of Bursor & Bursor in Walnut Creek, California.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York case number 1:23-CV-03450-JHR