POM Wonderful VS Naked Juice
Verdict DROP IT DROP IT
The Reality An FTC Administrative Law Judge ruled that expert testimony showed insufficient competent and reliable scientific evidence to support these disease-related claims, and the full FTC Commission subsequently found POM had made deceptive claims across 36 separate advertisements and promotional materials. The FTC's Final Order barred POM from claiming any product treats or prevents disease unless backed by two randomized, well-controlled human clinical trials. POM appealed, but the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the FTC's decision in January 2015, and the US Supreme Court declined to review the case in 2016, letting the ruling against POM stand as final. A consolidated class-action lawsuit in California alleged the products contained added synthetic vitamins and other ingredients inconsistent with the 'all natural' and 'non-GMO' labeling, including genetically altered soy in some varieties. PepsiCo settled in 2013 for $9 million while continuing to deny the labels were misleading or false, agreeing to redesign labels to eliminate or modify the specific claims at issue and to stop describing the juices as 'all natural' going forward. Consumers who purchased the products between September 27, 2007, and August 19, 2013, could claim up to $75 with proof of purchase or $45 without.
SHORT ANSWER
POM Wonderful: POM Wonderful's claims that its pomegranate juice treats or prevents heart disease, prostate cancer, and erectile dysfunction were found deceptive by the FTC, upheld by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2015, and left standing after the Supreme Court declined to review the case in 2016.
Naked Juice: PepsiCo paid $9 million in 2013 to settle a class-action lawsuit alleging Naked Juice products labeled 'all natural' and 'non-GMO' actually contained genetically altered soy and added synthetic ingredients, and agreed to stop using the 'all natural' claim.