WINDER LAW FIRM
Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuit
Some individuals and families are taking legal action related to their long-term use of Design Essentials hair relaxers. Lawsuits say that Design Essentials’s hair relaxers may be linked to severe health issues. Reported health problems range from fibroid-related hysterectomies to hormone-related cancers.
Some scientific studies have found a link between regular hair relaxer use and certain types of cancer. The findings from that research are still not settled, and research remains ongoing. Hair relaxer companies deny these allegations and say their products follow regulations.
Did you or a loved one use chemical hair straighteners and later have one of these conditions? If so, you may explore legal options.
- Uterine cancer
- Ovarian cancer
- Endometrial cancer
- Hysterectomy (including due to uterine fibroids)
You can:
- Check potential eligibility here, or
- Get a free no-obligation case evaluation here.
Free No Obligation Consultation
Background of the Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuit
Chemical hair relaxers are sold as creams or lotions that work to permanently straighten a person’s hair. While anyone can use these relaxers, research shows they are most popular among African Americans and Latinas. A study from the National Institutes of Health found that 66% of African Americans and 25% of Hispanic/Latina people use hair straighteners on a regular basis.
These products rely on strong alkaline bases like lye to straighten hair. Some studies suggest that long-term users may be at higher risk for uterine cancer, ovarian cancer, and other reproductive problems. These products may also contain endocrine-disrupting compounds, which can cause fertility issues.
Many popular hair care brands face legal claims. These claims say their products might raise cancer and fertility risks. Some of these companies include:
- L’Oréal
- SoftSheen-Carson
- ORS (formerly Organic Root Stimulator)
- Just for Me
- Motions
- African Pride
- Strength of Nature
- TCB Naturals
- Crème of Nature
- African Royale
- Silk Elements
- McBride Research Laboratories, Inc. (parent company of Design Essentials)
- And others
Over the past few years, there have been several chemical hair straightener lawsuits. These lawsuits have now been combined into a multidistrict litigation (MDL). An MDL lawsuit consolidates many similar civil cases from different districts across the U.S. into one court for streamlined pretrial proceedings.
McBride Research Laboratories, Inc. is included in these lawsuits, leading many to refer to these cases as the Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuit.
Who May Be Eligible for a Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuit?
In a Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) each person files an individual lawsuit that may later be transferred into the MDL. To pursue a the Design Essentials hair relaxer lawsuit, you must meet certain requirements. First, you need to have used Design Essentials hair relaxer products for an extended time. Second, you should have a medical condition that might be linked to their use. Finally, you need a documented medical diagnosis of that condition. Whether the product caused the injury is determined through the legal process, including expert evidence.
If a person used a Design Essentials hair relaxer 2-6 times per year for at least 4 years, that may be considered steady use. A person who used the product 5+ times in one year may be considered a frequent user. If a steady or frequent user was later diagnosed with ovarian cancer, they might be eligible.
Winder Law Firm is gathering information from individuals with potential legal claims who have been diagnosed with certain health conditions. Inquiries may be shared with a partner law firm under a marketing arrangement.
Possible Eligibility Criteria
To file an individual Design Essentials lawsuit, you must show long-term use of the hair relaxer. For example, a woman who used Design Essentials relaxers three times a year for ten years may be eligible.
- A steady user generally used relaxers 2-6 times a year for at least four years.
- A frequent user generally used them at least five times in one year.
You also need proof of a related medical diagnosis. Cancers like ovarian, uterine, or endometrial cancer may qualify. A hysterectomy, even due to uterine fibroids, may be a qualifying diagnosis.
Participation in these lawsuits will also require proper documentation. Examples of evidence that can help support your claim include:
- Medical records
- A qualifying medical diagnosis
- Surgical notes from your medical care provider
- Receipts that confirm regular purchase of the hair relaxer products
- Receipts or records from salon visits
- Photos showing use of the hair relaxer products
- A timeline that shows long-term relaxer use before diagnosis
Request a free case review! If you or a loved one meet the criteria above, you may have legal options. You can request a free legal consultation here.
You can request a free case review here.
Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Background & Marketing Allegations
Design Essentials is a well-known professional hair care brand. It operates under the parent company McBride Research Laboratories, and has over 30 years of history.
This African American-owned company started in 1990. The company was founded by Cornell McBride Sr. They focus on hair care products for curly hair, and their marketing targets African American and Latina customers. The company sells its products in over 30 countries around the world.
About Design Essentials Chemical Relaxers
The company focuses on selling professional-grade hair care products. These products are sold mostly through licensed stylists and salons. Design Essentials has generally marketed its hair relaxers, alongside a wide range of styling products, to people with curly, coily, and highly textured hair. This has allowed the company to develop important relationships within the Black beauty community.
For example, the Honey Nectar Time Release Relaxer is one hair care product developed by Design Essentials. This base straightens hair and includes vitamins and proteins to strengthen the hair. However, this product uses a sodium hydroxide (lye) base. Sodium hydroxide is a highly caustic chemical. It can cause scalp irritation and burns. In the hair relaxer litigation, plaintiffs allege that repeated exposure to certain chemicals in relaxers may increase the risk of hormone-related cancers.
How Design Essentials Marketed Its Hair Relaxers
One of the main issues in the legal case is the company’s marketing strategies. The plaintiffs claim the company was not clear about the potential dangers of their products. They specifically note that there was no warning about potential cancer-causing agents.
Design Essentials marketed their products as a professional solution to straighten hair. Most of the marketing materials were focused exclusively on the benefits of the products and the salon-grade performance.
Misleading “Natural,” “Healthy,” and “Nourishing” Claims
Design Essentials marketed many of its hair relaxer products as containing natural ingredients. Ads and product descriptions often used terms like “healthy” and “nourishing.” These claims may have led some consumers to believe the products were safer.
The use of “healthy” in descriptions might have been misleading. The company highlighted natural ingredients like milk, honey, nectar, olive oil, and shea butter. However, it did not clearly disclose the risks associated with the lye bases.
The plaintiffs argue that users were misled into believing the hair relaxers lacked toxic chemicals because of the emphasis on these natural ingredients.
Mostly Black and Brown Women Who Are Affected
Black and Latina women tend to use hair relaxers more often, given the structure of their hair. Research shows that they also tend to start to use these products at younger ages. The lawsuits allege that the marketing strategies may have been deceptive to this demographic group of mostly women of color.
Furthermore, some products were openly marketed to younger girls. This led many young Black and Latina girls to use the products from an early age. Some studies suggest long-term exposure to these chemicals may raise the risk of negative health effects.
Furthermore, research has found that many young black women assume that straight hair can help to promote their professional growth. One survey found that 45 percent of Black girls had felt hair discrimination. The same survey found similar discrimination for Black mothers. About half of all Black mothers felt discrimination because of their hair.
The combination of societal pressures for straight hair and deceptive marketing of hair relaxer products may have put women of color at greater risk.
Scientific Research Included in Lawsuits
Some scientific studies suggest a potential connection between cancer and chemical hair relaxers. These studies are not definitive, but show potential associations.
For example, the 2022 NIH Sister Study found that women who used hair straightening products four or more times per year had about twice the risk of uterine cancer compared with non-users.
Additionally, some hair relaxer products include certain ingredients that may be linked to higher risk of endometrial cancer. The American Cancer Society states that “some studies have found that using chemical hair straighteners (relaxers) often and for many years might increase the risk of endometrial cancer.”
Endometrial cancer is affected by hormone levels. Studies have found that certain hair relaxer ingredients may affect hormone systems, which could potentially increase the risk of hormone-related cancers like endometrial cancer.
Another study published in the Oxford Journal Carincogenesis suggests that frequent use of hair straighteners or relaxers may be associated with the occurrence of ovarian cancers.
A 2022 study found that women using hair straighteners four times a year had about double the risk for developing uterine cancer. A study from the National Institutes of Health stated that regular use of hair straighteners or relaxers is linked to higher rates of thyroid cancer and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Similarly, a 2023 study from Boston University found that Black women using hair relaxers more than twice a year for over five years had more than a 50% increased risk of uterine cancer.
The lawsuits against Design Essentials and others claim that:
- The companies may have been aware of the risks of the chemicals in their products.
- There were no warning labels about these risks.
- Plaintiffs allege that better communication and safer ingredients could have prevented health issues.
Hair Relaxer Product Regulation
Because hair relaxers are categorized as cosmetics, the FDA states that most cosmetics are not pre-tested by regulators.
Companies like Design Essentials are not required to obtain FDA pre-approval before selling their products. Some plaintiffs allege that the lack of testing and regulation may be related to increased risk.
How to File a Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuit
To pursue a Design Essentials hair relaxer lawsuit, you generally must meet certain requirements. These are the steps to follow to start a Design Essentials hair relaxer claim:
- Step 1: Contact a law firm handling hair relaxer cancer lawsuits.
- Step 2: Collect relevant documents. These can include medical records, product-use history, and a diagnosis timeline.
- Step 3: If you qualify, an attorney may file your individual lawsuit, which may be transferred into MDL No. 3060 for coordinated pretrial proceedings.
What Evidence Is Needed?
You will need to compile at least two types of qualifying evidence. This should include:
- Medical documents showing a qualifying diagnosis
- Evidence that you used Design Essentials hair relaxer products over the long term
- Receipts, salon or stylist records, product photos, or a written timeline of use
Do I Need an Attorney?
An attorney is not required to file a lawsuit. However, many people find it easier to work with a lawyer because of the difficult legal process. Hiring an attorney can help you determine your eligibility, explain MDL No. 3060, track deadlines, and organize evidence.
Is There Settlement Information For Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuits?
Settlement Disclaimer: Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Each case is unique, and compensation depends on individual circumstances.
With every lawsuit, potential compensation depends on many factors. The compensation you might be entitled to will depend on your individual case and the evidence presented.
Settlement Range for Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
It’s important to know that there is no guaranteed payment. This applies to anyone who thinks Design Essentials hair relaxers harmed their health. Any potential settlement will depend on unique individual cases. The MDL case is ongoing.
Factors That May Impact Settlement Amount
What factors determine whether a plaintiff might receive a settlement? Some possible factors affecting the settlement amount include:
- Type and severity of the cancer or injury
- Whether major surgery was required (such as a hysterectomy)
- Medical expenses and future care needs
- Impact on fertility and reproductive health
- Lost income or reduced earning capacity
- Physical pain and emotional suffering
- Strength and detail of evidence linking relaxer use and diagnosis
Get a Free Design Essentials Hair Relaxer Case Review
Note: Fill out the form or call to see if legal options may be available. Inquiries will be shared with a partner law firm under a marketing arrangement to assist with next steps.
Have you or a loved one been diagnosed with a condition? This might be after using Design Essentials or similar hair relaxers. These cases are often called the Design Essentials lawsuit, hair relaxer lawsuit, or perm lawsuit. You can request a free case review here.
Fact Checked
Winder Law Firm strives to provide accurate and timely information, but the content on this page is for informational purposes only and should not be taken as legal advice. If you need legal guidance or are considering legal action, consult an attorney. This website strives to follow applicable state bar and ABA ethical marketing rules. We are not responsible for third-party content, including linked law firms or services, and do not endorse or recommend them. We bear no liability for security risks or issues from external links.
View our editorial guidelines for more details.
Legally Approved
The content on this page has been reviewed for legal accuracy by Attorney Aaron A. Winder. This content is for informational purposes only and not legal advice. It is not a substitute for professional legal counsel. Winder Law Firm does not guarantee this website content’s accuracy, completeness, or relevance. This website may contain inaccuracies, typographical errors, or outdated information and does not necessarily reflect the firm’s or its employees’ opinions. Consult an attorney for legal guidance.
Legally Reviewed
The content on this page has been reviewed for legal accuracy by Attorney Aaron A. Winder. This content is for informational purposes only and not legal advice. It is not a substitute for professional legal counsel. Winder Law Firm does not guarantee this website content’s accuracy, completeness, or relevance. This website may contain inaccuracies, typographical errors, or outdated information and does not necessarily reflect the firm’s or its employees’ opinions. Consult an attorney for legal guidance.
Award Methodology
The CALI Excellence for the Future Award® is given to the highest-scoring student in a law school course, as determined by the instructor or registrar. This award recognizes academic excellence in legal education and is granted by the Center for Computer-Assisted Legal Instruction (CALI), a nonprofit consortium of law schools and organizations.
Attorney Aaron A. Winder, owner of Winder Law Firm, received this award in Advanced Criminal Procedure while studying at Gonzaga University School of Law.
More information about the CALI Excellence for the Future Award® can be found at CALI’s website.
Disclaimer
This page offers general information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney‑client relationship. Allegations mentioned are unproven in court. Information is based on public sources. Inquiries may be shared with a partner firm under a marketing arrangement.