Meat-Substitute Fungus Blamed for Sickness; Label Warnings Sought

Quorn Foods should include warnings on its food labels now that more than 1,000 people have reported gastrointestinal reactions to a fungus used as a meat substitute, a Connecticut consumer suit says.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest, serving as co-counsel in the suit, reported that more than 1,400 American and British consumers have filed complaints about the fungus on the CSPI Web site since 2002.

"It's almost unheard of for a company to market something as healthy when it actually makes a significant percentage of its customers sick within minutes or hours," CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner said in a statement.

"It is the company's legal obligation to warn customers about these serious adverse reactions, and getting the company to meet that obligation is the purpose of this lawsuit," he added.

Arizona resident Kathy Cardinale filed the suit in the Connecticut Superior Court on behalf of all U.S. consumers who bought a Quorn product in the last three years.

Cardinale became sick with stomach-virus-like symptoms after eating the defendant's Chik'n Patties, which contained the chicken-flavored meat-substitute fungus. Cardinale says she would not have bought the product if there had been a label warning about the affects of the fungus, the complaint says.

The Connecticut-based, British-owned Quorn Foods entered the U.S. market in 2002. The company maintains that the fungus is related to mushrooms and is safe, the complaint says.

Quorn issued a statement calling the lawsuit frivolous and noting that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved its labeling.

The suit alleges that the fungus is not like normally edible mushrooms, but is a solid mold that Quorn grows in soil.

In 2005 the CSPI conducted a phone survey of British consumers and found that more people reported reactions to Quorn products than to common food allergens such as milk, peanuts and shellfish, the complaint says.

Quorn deceptively markets its products, the suits alleges, because it fails to warn customers of the risk of reaction to their ingredients.

While the FDA considers Quorn products safe, the CSPI has asked the agency to revisit its policy.

The suit's primary goal is injunctive relief to force the defendant to include warning labels on its products. The requested damages total less than $2,500, with no personal injury awards sought.

To comment, ask questions or contribute articles, contact West.Andrews.Editor@ThomsonReuters.com.

Cardinale is represented by Daniel S. Blinn of the Consumer Law Group in Rocky Hill, Conn., and Stephen Gardner of the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Dallas.