Carnation Breakfast Essentials Lawsuit Claims Nestle Drink Is Mostly Sugar and Water

California man alleges that the ready-to drink breakfast products contain 24% of the FDA’s recommended daily value for added sugars.

A class action lawsuit claims that Nestle’s Carnation Breakfast Essentials drinks are marketed as protein-focused beverages, despite being primarily made up of sugar and other non-protein ingredients.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Eric Testori in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on October 6, naming Nestle Health Science U.S. Holdings Inc., as well as various unknown entities as defendants.

Carnation Breakfast Essentials is sold in ready-to-drink bottles and powder mixes, marketed as a source of protein, vitamins and minerals for children and adults. The drinks come in flavors such as chocolate and vanilla, with high-protein and fiber options that Nestle promotes as supporting muscle health and overall nutrition.

However, according to Testori’s lawsuit, the first two ingredients listed on the product’s label are water and glucose, leading to allegations that the drinks contain more sugar than protein and are not the healthy breakfast alternatives Nestle advertises.

In his lawsuit, Testori, of Bakersfield, California, indicates that he purchased Carnation Breakfast Essentials Classic French Vanilla ready-to-drink products multiple times in stores and on Amazon between 2021 and 2023, believing he was buying a healthy breakfast drink.

However, the lawsuit points out that although the front label highlights “10g protein per serving,” the product’s side label lists 12 grams of sugar, which is about 24% of the FDA’s daily recommended value, making it primarily a sugary beverage rather than a true nutritional drink.

Building on that claim, Testori cites FDA and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations that prohibit marketing a product as “nutritional” or highlighting a positive nutrient, such as protein, while downplaying the presence of unhealthy ingredients like added sugars. Therefore, Nestle’s “10g protein” front-label claim violates federal labeling rules because it misleads consumers about the drink’s overall nutritional value, Testori alleges.

Based on these allegations, the lawsuit states that Carnation Breakfast Essentials are neither a “nutritional drink” nor an “essential” part of breakfast as they are advertised to be. As a result, Testori says he and other consumers paid a premium for a product they believed was healthy, while the drink’s high sugar content undermines its nutritional value.

“When purchasing the Product, Plaintiff was seeking a product that would provide at least 10 grams of digestible protein per serving as part of a balanced breakfast. Had Plaintiff known that the Product’s protein content was accompanied by 12 grams of sugar, or 24% of the daily recommended value, which undermines its healthfulness, he would not have purchased the Product, or at minimum would have paid less.”

— Eric Testori v. Nestle Health Science U.S. Holdings Inc. et al

Testori raises allegations of violations of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act and False Advertising Law, common law fraud, deceit and misrepresentation, unlawful, unfair and fraudulent trade practices, and unjust enrichment.

He is seeking certification of his complaint for class action status, in addition to an order to stop Nestle from continuing its allegedly unlawful, deceptive, fraudulent and unfair business practices, as well as compensatory, statutory, punitive and treble damages.

Ultra-Processed Foods Lawsuits

Testori’s complaint comes as a series of ultra-processed foods lawsuits have been filed nationwide, alleging that unhealthy additives in these kinds of products have led to multiple health concerns for adults and children.

Ultra-processed foods (UPFs) include many popular snacks, meals and drinks made with sugar, salt and other substances that are often used to enhance flavor, extend shelf life, or improve texture, while providing little to no nutritional value.

One of the first lawsuits to address the potential health issues caused by these kinds of foods was filed by Bryce Martinez in December 2024, alleging that major brands like Kraft Heinz, Coca-Cola, General Mills and others had aggressively marketed UPFs to children and low-income communities for years, leading many individuals like him to suffer from type 2 diabetes and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

However, a federal judge dismissed the Martinez lawsuit in August, ruling that the claims lacked a clear legal basis or a specific link between Martinez’s injuries and any particular product, ingredient or brand. 

This decision is likely to affect how many current and future plaintiffs choose to pursue claims and structure lawsuits alleging that routine consumption of ultra-processed foods contributed to type 2 diabetes or NAFLD in themselves or their children.

Sign up for more health and legal news that could affect you or your family.