Product Liability

Chemical Hair Relaxer Cancer Litigation

Chemical Hair Relaxer Cancer Litigation — Product Liability class action lawsuit

Case Overview

This multidistrict litigation (MDL) centralizes a growing number of lawsuits from women, particularly women of color, who claim that their long-term use of chemical hair straightening and relaxer products led to the development of hormone-related cancers and conditions, including uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, and endometriosis.

The lawsuits allege that many of these products contain endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) like phthalates, which can interfere with the body's hormonal systems. The litigation gained momentum following a study by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) that found a statistically significant correlation between the frequent use of chemical hair straighteners and an increased risk of uterine cancer. Plaintiffs accuse major cosmetics companies, including L'Oréal and Revlon, of failing to warn consumers about these severe health risks.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are chemical hair relaxers linked to cancer?

Lawsuits allege that chemical hair relaxers, including products from L'Oréal, Revlon, and other manufacturers, are linked to an increased risk of uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, and other health issues. Some studies have suggested a potential connection, particularly with frequent use. If you have health concerns about hair relaxer use, consult with a healthcare provider.

Can I sue for using chemical hair relaxers?

Yes, there is ongoing class action litigation against L'Oréal, Revlon, and other hair relaxer manufacturers alleging they failed to warn consumers about cancer risks. If you used these products and have been diagnosed with uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, or related conditions, you may be eligible to join or file a claim in the class action lawsuit.

How do I file a claim in the chemical hair relaxer settlement?

To file a claim, you typically need to provide proof of your hair relaxer product purchase and documentation of a cancer diagnosis. You should monitor the specific settlement or case website for claim deadlines and submission instructions, as requirements vary by jurisdiction and settlement agreement.

Related Cases

Ozempic / Mounjaro GI Injury (Gastroparesis & Bowel Obstruction) Products Liability MDL — Product Liability class action lawsuit

Ozempic / Mounjaro GI Injury (Gastroparesis & Bowel Obstruction) Products Liability MDL

Current
Product Liability
Patients who used GLP-1 receptor agonist drugs Ozempic (semaglutide) and Mounjaro (tirzepatide) for weight loss or diabetes management allege they suffered severe gastrointestinal injuries — including gastroparesis (stomach paralysis), bowel obstruction, and intestinal ileus — that were not adequately disclosed in the drugs' warnings.
Victoza (Liraglutide) Lawsuit: Vision Loss (NAION) Claims — Product Liability class action lawsuit

Victoza (Liraglutide) Lawsuit: Vision Loss (NAION) Claims

Current
Product Liability
Victoza (liraglutide) lawsuits claim that Novo Nordisk failed to warn patients about the risk of non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), a condition causing sudden vision loss. Users of the GLP-1 diabetes drug allege that the manufacturer did not adequately disclose the potential eye damage risks.
B. Braun Aesculap Knee Replacement Defective Device Lawsuit — Product Liability class action lawsuit

B. Braun Aesculap Knee Replacement Defective Device Lawsuit

Current
Product Liability
A lawsuit against B. Braun alleges that its Aesculap knee replacement devices have serious design defects causing metallosis, early device failure, and complications requiring revision surgeries. The company is accused of concealing these defects from regulators while continuing to promote the device.