Arizona sues L’Oreal over alleged cancer risks in hair relaxers

Arizona has filed a lawsuit against L’Oreal SA and its US subsidiary, accusing the cosmetics giant of failing to disclose alleged cancer risks associated with its hair relaxer products.

Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes filed the lawsuit in state court late Thursday, making Arizona the first US state to take legal action against a hair relaxer manufacturer over alleged links between the products and cancer.

The lawsuit claims L’Oreal violated Arizona’s consumer protection laws by selling and promoting hair relaxers without properly warning consumers about potential health risks. The products are widely used by women with textured hair, particularly African American women.

According to the lawsuit, L’Oreal and related companies marketed hair relaxers to women and children for decades while allegedly failing to provide adequate information about possible links to ovarian and uterine cancers.

Arizona officials are seeking financial penalties and damages from the company. The state is also asking the court to order L’Oreal to stop selling the products in Arizona unless clear warnings about the alleged cancer risks are provided to consumers.

The lawsuit further accuses the company of benefiting from longstanding social pressures surrounding beauty standards and textured hair. It claims that L’Oreal and other companies took advantage of discriminatory beauty expectations affecting people of African descent while putting commercial interests ahead of consumer safety.

L’Oreal, however, has rejected the allegations and defended the safety of its products.

A spokesperson for L’Oreal USA said the company remains confident in the safety of its hair care products and believes the claims against it lack both legal and scientific merit.

The legal action comes as L’Oreal faces thousands of similar lawsuits filed by women and their families. More than 12,000 cases have been consolidated in a federal court in Chicago under a multidistrict litigation process.

The procedure is designed to handle large numbers of similar lawsuits more efficiently while allowing individual cases to maintain their separate claims.

The products named in the wider litigation have been sold under several brands, including Dark and Lovely and Optimum. The hair relaxers are designed to permanently straighten textured or curly hair.

Concerns surrounding the products increased following a major study released in 2022 by researchers connected to the US National Institutes of Health. The study reported that women who frequently used chemical hair straightening products were more than twice as likely to develop uterine cancer compared with women who did not use them.

The findings triggered growing concern among consumers and contributed to a wave of lawsuits against companies that manufacture and sell chemical hair relaxers.

L’Oreal has disputed the interpretation of the study, arguing that it did not establish that the products directly cause uterine cancer or other medical conditions alleged in the lawsuits.

The company has maintained that the available scientific evidence does not prove a causal relationship between the use of its products and cancer.

The lawsuits filed by individual women and their families seek compensation for various alleged harms. Claims include damages for physical pain and suffering, medical expenses, lost income and other economic losses. Some plaintiffs are also seeking reimbursement for money spent purchasing the products.

L’Oreal is not the only company facing legal action over hair relaxers. Revlon and other manufacturers have also been named in lawsuits involving similar allegations. Revlon has likewise denied that its products are responsible for cancer.

The Arizona case could add further pressure on the cosmetics industry as regulators, consumers and courts continue to examine the potential health risks associated with chemical hair straightening products.

The lawsuit does not establish that L’Oreal’s products cause cancer, and the allegations remain subject to legal proceedings. The case is expected to draw further attention to product safety, consumer warnings and the long-term health concerns surrounding chemical hair relaxers.