WHITE PLAINS, N.Y. (Legal Newsline) - The maker of feminine hygiene rinses, a.k.a. douches, has mounted its defense against a class action lawsuit that says the practice is bad for vaginas.
pH-D Feminine Health filed a motion to dismiss June 26 in New York federal court in Chandra Campbell's lawsuit that alleges douching can lead to an array of health issues. She claims women who douche weekly are five times more likely to develop bacterial vaginosis than women who do not douche.
Campbell's complaint says some medica professionals do not recommend douching.
"But the fact that there is a difference of opinion in the medical community over the use of these products does not make false or misleading pH-D's representation that its product is 'suitable for vaginal use,'" the motion to dismiss says.
Not to mention, pH-D says, the products, which only contain purified water and boric acid, are approved by the Food and Drug Administration.
"Boric acid is a common and safe ingredient used in many cosmetic products and feminine care products to help control vaginal odor," the motion says.
Campbell says 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.
The law firm Bursor & Fisher represents Campbell, while pH-D has hired Ethan Kobre of Schwartz Sladkus of New York City. Kobre is hoping to use the arguments in Campbell's complaint against her.
"By citing more than a dozen online articles discussing the propriety of douching as it relates to vaginal health, Plaintiff shows that she had ample resources at her disposal in deciding to purchase and use the Product," he wrote.
"Indeed, nowhere in her Complaint does Plaintiff allege otherwise, nor does (or could) she claim that pH-D controlled all the information about the use of feminine hygiene washes and douches.
"Plaintiff’s failure to make a more educated decision about her purchase cannot now be exploited to implicate pH-D in some 'fraud' claim."