David Protein Company Sued for False Nutrition Labeling

At a time when high protein snack and drink options are becoming increasingly more popular, the composition of David Protein bars is uncommon among competitors. Known for its low-calorie to protein ratio, containing 150 calories, 28g of protein, 2g of fat and 0g of sugar, David Protein has become an attractive choice for health-focused consumers.

While David Protein is priced higher per bar compared to rival brands such as Quest, Barebells or One, many consumers find its convenient macronutrient profile to be worth spending extra for. Despite the current success, this popular protein brand is facing a federal class action lawsuit over allegations that its bars contain more calories and fat than is stated on their nutrition labels.

Why were David Protein sued?

On Jan. 23, Daniella Lopez, David Freifeld and Crystal Paterson filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court in New York. They believe that David Protein deceived its consumers, violating FDA guidelines by marketing the bars with lower calories and fat than reality.

These lab tests found David Protein bars to contain up to 83 percent more calories and 400 percent more fat than what truly appears on the nutrition labels. Contrary to what David Protein bars indicate, the plaintiffs found these bars to contain anywhere from 268 to 275 calories and upwards of 13.5g of fat inside each bar, depending on the flavor.

David Protein’s Response

On March 12, CEO Peter Rahal responded to this lawsuit on davidprotein.com disputing the claims. “The lawsuit alleging that David Protein bars contain more calories and fat than stated on their nutrition labels is simply wrong. It rests on a flawed and misleading interpretation of how calories are determined for certain ingredients under U.S. food labeling regulations.”

The plaintiffs relied on bomb calorimetry, a method of calculating caloric values within a food by burning it and measuring the total heat released. Rahal argues that ingredients such as EPG, a fat substitute used heavily in David Protein bars, provide less metabolizable calories than the bomb calorimetry suggests. For this reason, the company believes it to be a flawed method of estimating the calories within their line of products.

“If you burn ingredients like complex carbohydrates, fiber or EPG in a calorimeter, these ingredients would appear to deliver far more calories than the body actually metabolizes.”

A Dietitian’s Opinion

Esterified Propoxylated Glycerol, referred to as EPG, is used in many products as a fat-replacement ingredient engineered to reduce calorie content. EPG has a large molecular structure that the digestive enzymes in the body struggle to catabolize properly. Due to its poor absorption, much less EPG is metabolized than standard fat would, despite bomb calorimetry flagging it as high-calorie.

Dana Angelo White, a registered dietitian and journalist gives her opinion on the matter in an article published on Food Network, “The issue here is that traditional methods of nutrition analysis don’t properly account for EPG, thus creating what appears to be a wild discrepancy. Since EPG is only absorbed in the body in small quantities, it cannot be counted via traditional methods.”

According to David Protein itself and supported by White’s analysis, David Protein believes it to be a simple misunderstanding, boiling it down to an error from the plaintiffs’ lab testing method. With the lawsuit still underway, the result could impact how fat substitutes, such as EPG, are regulated and labeled in the future.