644. Misbranding of Nature's Minerals.    V. S. v. 40 12-Ounce Packages, 10 6-
Ounce Packages, and 15 4-Ounce Packages of Nature's Minerals. Default
decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. D. C. No. 4268. Sample Nos.
65461-E, 55462-E.)
On April 15, 1941, the United States attorney for the Western District of
Washington filed a libel against the above-named product at Tacoma, Wash.,
alleging that it had been shipped in part by P. G. Jurich from Pasadena, Calif.,
on or about September 13, 1940, and January 9, 1941, and in part by Nature's
Mineral Co. from Indianapolis, Ind., on or about September 17,1940; and charging
that it was misbranded.
Analyses of samples of the article showed that it consisted essentially of
compounds of calcium, magnesium, iron, and sodium, phosphates, carbonates,
sulfates, chlorides, sulfur, and fluorine.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that it would be dangerous to
health when used in the dosage or with the frequency or duration prescribed,
which directed that ? to 1 round teaspoonful be taken three times a day.
It was alleged to be misbranded further: (1) In that the statements, "Nature's
Minerals may be used as an aid in supplying in concrete form the minerals
sometimes found deficient in the ordinary diet. * * * Recommended as a
scientific combination of minerals capable of being utilized by the different
organs of the body. * * * Best results will be obtained by placing dry on the
tongue," were false and misleading. (2) In that statements on display cards
representing that it would be efficacious in the treatment or prevention of cancer,
colds, hardening of the arteries, diabetes, stomach, blood, kidney, and bladder
trouble, colitis, rheumatism, neuritis, and gallstone, and that by its use the
purchaser would enjoy joyous and lasting health, were false and misleading
since it would not be efficacious for such purposes. (3) In that representations
in an accompanying circular [these representations are set forth in D. B. N. J. No.
541] were false and misleading since it would not be efficacious for such purposes.
It was alleged to be adulterated and misbranded under the provisions of the
law applicable to foods, as reported in F. N. J. No. 2999.
On June 30, 1941, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation
was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.-