When it comes to the battle against aging, we'd like to think we put up a good fight — be it lotions, potions, or, should you choose, more invasive measures. However, if results are just not what you want them to be, who's really to blame? One San Joaquin County woman says that, in her case, Procter & Gamble is.
The Los Angeles Times reports that Lorette Perez-Pirio used the Olay Regenerist Anti-Aging Eye Roller and the Regenerating Eye Cream under the impression that, as claimed, these products would essentially reverse the hands of time and provide Perez-Pirio with a more youthful appearance. Sadly, this was not the case, and Perez-Pirio's was prompted to sue. According to the LA Times, after taking her claims to court, P&G responded that they actually "do not possess the requisite competent and reliable scientific evidence" to back their products' claims.
While we can understand Perez-Pirio frustration with poor results, is it really the beauty company that should be held accountable? There are numerous factors that affect how each individual's skin will react to any number of products — what works miraculously for one may be a total dud for another. But, on the flip, there is so much money to be made, and wasted, when companies make false claims about their products. We'll be pleading the fifth this time, but we're dying to hear from you: Would you head to court if your products let you down? Is this a legal beauty battle worth fighting? (Los Angeles Times)
Photo: Via Walmart