On September 23, 2026, Sue Colby initiated a class action lawsuit against Quest Nutrition LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The lawsuit alleges that Quest misrepresents its protein bars, cookies, candies, and baked goods as healthy options while using erythritol, a sugar alcohol associated with increased risks of heart attack and stroke.

Read More

Quest, a subsidiary of Simply Good Foods, markets its products as high in protein and low in sugar, promoting their ingredients as of "only quality ingredients." The lawsuit notes that retailers place these items in nutrition and sports-nutrition sections, further enhancing their health food image. The proposed class action encompasses at least 45 products, including 28 protein bar flavors, six regular and four frosted cookie varieties, four bake shop items (such as donuts and brownies), and three candy products.

The case references a 2023 Cleveland Clinic study published in Nature Medicine, which linked elevated blood erythritol levels to a doubling of heart attack and stroke risk within three years. The report indicated that erythritol levels in the bloodstream increased significantly after consumption, affecting platelet function for an extended period. A follow-up study in 2024 discussed erythritol's potential to make platelets more reactive, prompting calls for reevaluation of the sweetener. A 2025 University of Colorado Boulder study allegedly found that erythritol could impair the cells in the brain's small blood vessels, associating it with a higher stroke risk.

Colby states that she purchased a Quest chocolate chip cookie dough protein bar after being influenced by the brand's claims about ingredient quality and health goals. She asserts she would have chosen a different product or paid less if the marketing had been accurate, leading to claims of misleading advertising.

The lawsuit includes four legal claims: the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act for product misrepresentation; the California Unfair Competition Law for unlawful business practices; California False Advertising Law for misleading advertising; and unjust enrichment, alleging that the company profited unfairly.

Colby seeks compensatory, statutory, and punitive damages, along with restitution and attorney fees. She also requests a court order for Quest to rectify its marketing practices. Colby aims to represent a nationwide class of consumers who purchased the Quest products for personal use, with a Californian subclass for the state-specific claims.

The lawsuit states that if Quest fails to address the alleged violations within 30 days of receiving a pre-suit notice, Colby plans to pursue further damages under the Consumers Legal Remedies Act. As of now, there is no settlement, claims process, or available funds related to this lawsuit.