Complaint challenges Prevagen memory claims

The grievance, filed Monday in opposition to Quincy Bioscience and associated firms, says entrepreneurs relied on a research that didn't show Prevagen works any higher than a placebo, officers mentioned. It cited nationwide TV adverts extolling reminiscence and cognitive advantages.

"The entrepreneurs of Prevagen preyed on the fears of older customers experiencing age-related reminiscence loss," Jessica Wealthy, director of the FTC's Bureau of Client Safety, mentioned in a press release. "However one important factor these entrepreneurs forgot is that their claims have to be backed up by actual scientific proof."

Prevagen is bought in main pharmacies. From 2007 to 2015, gross sales totaled $165 million, in keeping with the grievance. A bottle consists of about 30 tablets and prices between $24 and $68, in keeping with the FTC. The lively ingredient is a protein derived from jellyfish.

Quincy Bioscience fired again in opposition to what it known as "an unfounded and inaccurate grievance."

"Quincy has amassed a big physique of proof that Prevagen improves reminiscence and helps wholesome mind perform" the corporate mentioned.

Quincy mentioned it believes the disagreement lies in an "interpretation and evaluation of the info ... their consultants merely disagree with ours over the right way to interpret the research outcomes."

The FTC and Schneiderman declare Prevagen's entrepreneurs have violated the FTC Act and New York state legal guidelines. The grievance goals to ban future false claims in regards to the complement, receive refunds for customers and impose civil penalties.

"The advertising for Prevagen is a clear-cut fraud, from the label on the bottle to the adverts airing throughout the nation," Schneiderman mentioned in a press launch.

The grievance was filed by two Federal Commerce Commissioners in a 2-Zero vote, with Commissioner Maureen Ohlhausen not taking part, in keeping with the FTC. Quincy Bioscience known as the swimsuit's submitting by solely two commissioners "unprecedented" and famous they had been each from the identical political social gathering.

"This case is one other instance of presidency overreach and regulators extinguishing innovation by imposing arbitrary new guidelines on small companies like ours," the corporate mentioned, vowing to defend itself.

The grievance was filed within the US District Court docket for the Southern District of New York.