Dr. Berg Lawsuit: Class Action, Prop 65, Discipline, and Copyright

Dr. Eric Berg, the chiropractor and YouTube health personality behind Dr. Berg Nutritionals, has been named in more than one lawsuit tied to his supplement business, and he was disciplined years earlier by a state medical board. The most active Dr. Berg lawsuit is a 2023 California class action over the labeling of his electrolyte powder. A separate California Proposition 65 case over lead in four of his supplements settled in 2021 for $82,500, and the Virginia Board of Medicine reprimanded Berg himself in 2007 over out-of-scope techniques and misleading advertising.

The 2023 Electrolyte Powder Class Action

On January 17, 2023, a California consumer named Scheibe filed a class action against Dr. Berg Holdings, LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The case is Scheibe v. Dr. Berg Holdings, LLC, No. 3:23-cv-00084-DMS-JLB, and it targets the company’s Original Keto Electrolytes powder, sold in seven flavors including raspberry and lemon, grape, orange, and strawberry lemonade.¹

What the Complaint Alleges

The front label states “No Artificial Anything!” and the product’s Amazon listing claims “Zero Artificial Ingredients.” The plaintiff says both statements are false because the powder contains DL malic acid, which the complaint describes as a synthetic substance made from petrochemicals rather than a naturally occurring ingredient.² FDA regulations distinguish the two forms of the acid: L-malic acid occurs naturally in foods, while “racemic DL-malic acid does not occur naturally” and is produced commercially by hydrating fumaric acid or maleic acid.³

The complaint says the ingredient panel lists only “malic acid” without specifying the DL form, and that the powder relies on what it calls an artificial flavoring agent to simulate fruit flavors. On that basis, the plaintiff argues the label should carry a prominent “Artificially Flavored” disclosure under federal and California law, and that the “no artificial” claims let Dr. Berg Nutritionals charge a premium price consumers would not have paid otherwise.¹

Claims and Proposed Class

The complaint brings five California causes of action: unfair competition under Business and Professions Code § 17200; false advertising under § 17500; violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act; unjust enrichment; and breach of express warranty. The proposed class covers California consumers who bought any flavor of the product in the four years before the complaint was filed.² Available records do not show a resolution of the case.

The Proposition 65 Lead Settlement

In November 2021, the Environmental Research Center sued The Health & Wellness Center, Inc., doing business as Dr. Berg Nutritionals, in Alameda County Superior Court (No. 21CV001657). The nonprofit alleged that four Dr. Berg supplements exposed California consumers to lead without the warnings required by Proposition 65.⁴

The four products were:

Dr. Berg Cruciferous Superfood Phytonutrient Complex
Dr. Berg Estrogen Balance With DIM
Dr. Berg Keto Meal Replacement Shake (Chocolate Brownie flavor)
Dr. Berg’s Instant Kale Shake Chocolate

The parties resolved the case through a stipulated consent judgment. Dr. Berg Nutritionals agreed to pay $82,500, broken down into $38,325 in civil penalties split between a state environmental fund and the plaintiff, $28,728 for programs to reduce toxic chemical exposure, roughly $15,400 in the plaintiff’s legal fees and costs, and the remainder as reimbursement. The company did not admit any violation.⁵

Going forward, the company is permanently barred from selling those four products in California if they expose a consumer to more than 0.5 micrograms of lead per day, unless it provides a compliant Proposition 65 warning on the product label and, for online sales, on the checkout page when a California shipping address is entered. The judgment also required independent third-party lead testing of the products annually for at least three consecutive years.⁵

The 2007 Virginia Board of Medicine Discipline

On September 13, 2007, the Virginia Board of Medicine entered a consent order against Eric Berg, D.C. (License No. 0104-001851), covering conduct at his Alexandria, Virginia, practice between 2000 and 2006.⁶

What the Board Found

The Board found Berg had used techniques that fell outside the scope of chiropractic practice and lacked scientific or medical evidence of effectiveness: Body Restoration Technique, Nambudripad’s Allergy Elimination Technique, Contact Reflex Analysis, and the Acoustic Cardiograph. It also found he had kept inadequate patient records, failed to obtain signed consent forms, lost records for three patients that investigators requested, and published misleading advertising about the efficacy of these techniques for conditions including allergies, thyroid problems, infertility, and fibromyalgia.⁷ The order specifically flagged his failure to clarify in advertising that he was a chiropractor rather than a medical doctor, and cited an ad describing his book Dr. Berg’s Body Shape Diets as a “medical textbook,” which the Board called false or misleading.⁶

The Penalty

Berg received a formal reprimand and a $1,500 fine. He was ordered to stop using and advertising all four flagged techniques, complete six hours of continuing education in medical recordkeeping within six months, and submit to an unannounced inspection of his practice within a year. The order warned that any violation could result in suspension of his license. Berg neither admitted nor denied the findings but agreed not to contest them.⁶

Not every Dr. Berg lawsuit has been against him. In February 2017, Berg sued Dr. Jacob Torres, the Institute for Functional Health, LLC, and UC4Life Wellness Center LLC for copyright infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas (Dr. Eric Berg, D.C. v. Dr. Jacob Torres, No. 5:17-cv-00153). Available records do not detail what content was allegedly copied. The parties reached a settlement through mediation in July 2018, and the case was dismissed on an agreed motion on October 10, 2018.⁸

1
ClassAction.org. Scheibe v. Dr. Berg Holdings LLC Class Action Complaint
2
ClassAction.org. Dr. Berg Electrolyte Powder Naturally Flavored Not So Much Class Action Claims
3
eCFR. 21 CFR 184.1069 – Malic Acid
4
California Attorney General. Prop 65 Settlement – Environmental Research Center v. The Health and Wellness Center
5
California Attorney General. Prop 65 Consent Judgment – Environmental Research Center v. The Health and Wellness Center
6
Quackwatch. Eric Berg DC – Virginia Board of Medicine Consent Order
7
Quackwatch. Body Restoration Technique
8
CourtListener. Dr. Eric Berg DC v. Dr. Jacob Torres