A federal judge in Manhattan upheld a jury’s verdict against Quincy Bioscience, finding the company liable for deceptive marketing practices related to its memory supplement, Prevagen. The New York Attorney General’s office announced the victory, concluding a two-week trial that focused on whether Quincy had sufficient scientific evidence to support its claims about Prevagen’s ability to improve memory and cognitive function.
The jury concluded that Quincy had not substantiated its claims with reliable scientific evidence, finding some materially misleading and all having the tendency to deceive consumers. This constitutes fraud under New York law. The Attorney General will seek a permanent injunction to prevent Quincy from continuing its deceptive marketing practices in New York and will pursue monetary relief. The company marketed Prevagen extensively across New York State, including in major media markets like Albany, Syracuse, New York City, and the Southern Tier.
The lawsuit asserted that Quincy lacked adequate scientific evidence to back up its claims that Prevagen improved memory within 90 days, reduced age-related memory problems, provided various cognitive benefits, and was “clinically shown” to achieve these results. Quincy has been marketing Prevagen with these claims on product packaging since at least 2011 and in national television and radio ads since 2013. The supplement, which can cost up to $89.95 for a 30-day supply, is widely available online and at major retailers nationwide.
The Attorney General’s office and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) presented evidence challenging Quincy’s marketing claims and the science behind them. The FTC’s claims will be determined separately by the same judge. Expert testimony highlighted flaws in the design, execution, and analysis of Quincy’s clinical trial for Prevagen.
Internal Quincy documents and submissions to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revealed the company’s admission that Prevagen is rapidly digested and unlikely to reach the brain, undermining its claims of cognitive enhancement. The prosecution also presented numerous television advertisements and product packaging examples showcasing the unsubstantiated and misleading claims used to market Prevagen.
A key piece of evidence was testimony regarding a bar graph frequently used in Quincy’s advertising. The market development director admitted the graph selectively and misleadingly presented data from the clinical trial. Further damaging testimony came from Prevagen’s principal investigator, who acknowledged flaws in the study’s planning and execution.
The jury found Quincy liable for deceptive acts and practices, false advertising, and persistent fraud related to Prevagen, whose active ingredient is derived from a protein found in jellyfish. The judge’s acceptance of the verdict clears the way for the Attorney General to seek an injunction against further deceptive claims and to pursue financial penalties. The protein in Prevagen is known to make jellyfish glow, a fact often used in marketing materials.
