A lawsuit against David Protein, which alleged that the company misrepresented calorie and fat counts in its protein bars, has been dismissed, allowing the brand to refocus on its operations and customers. The class-action lawsuit had been filed by three customers in January 2026, accusing the company of deliberately misleading consumers regarding the nutritional content of its products.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/david-protein-bar-031226-84e88ad1816d465eb77b2283d5c63b17.jpg)
The dismissal of the lawsuit was confirmed in a notice obtained by PEOPLE, revealing that it was voluntarily withdrawn without prejudice. This means that the plaintiffs retain the option to re-file the complaint in the future. David Protein representative Markos Bitsakakis addressed the situation, emphasising that the brand’s chocolate chip cookie dough-flavoured bar accurately contains 150 calories, as stated on the packaging.
In an official statement posted on its website, David Protein expressed satisfaction with the resolution of the matter. The company’s announcement reinforced its commitment to maintaining accurate nutritional information. “We remain confident in the accuracy of our nutrition labeling,” the statement read.
The initial complaint, filed on January 23, 2026, accused David Protein of undervaluing calorie and fat contents to entice customers into paying a premium for its bars. The plaintiffs cited tests indicating discrepancies between the advertised and actual nutritional values of the products. Despite these allegations, representatives for David Protein were quick to defend their labelling practices.
Bitsakakis explained that the claims made against David Protein were based on a scientific method known as bomb calorimetry, which measures the heat released when food is burned to calculate calorie content. He highlighted that the bar contains an ingredient named esterified propoxylated glycerol (EPG), which is only partially digested by the human body. Due to this particularity, EPG has different FDA-approved caloric values that may not be accurately represented through standard bomb calorimetry.
Furthermore, Bitsakakis stated that David Protein’s nutritional labels accurately reflect the FDA-recognised values and are fully compliant with existing labelling regulations. This assurance followed an earlier statement from CEO Peter Rahal, who condemned the lawsuit as meritless and reflective of misconceptions surrounding basic scientific principles in nutrition labelling.
Rahal reiterated the company’s commitment to producing innovative products while prioritising a high protein-to-calorie ratio that consumers can trust. “David Protein remains committed to delivering innovative products,” he asserted, reinforcing the brand’s focus on customer satisfaction.
As of now, representatives for the plaintiffs have not publicly commented on the dismissal of the case. The resolution of this lawsuit comes at a time when consumer trust in nutritional information is paramount, particularly in the health and wellness sector, where transparency can significantly impact purchasing decisions.
Moving forward, David Protein aims to maintain its reputation for accuracy in nutritional labelling and to continue fostering customer loyalty through its range of protein bars. As the company continues its business operations, it appears poised to uphold its commitment to quality and transparency amidst the scrutiny that often accompanies health food products.