3625. Misbranding of Ayds candy. IT. S. v. 73 Packages of Ayds Easy Reducing Plan Candy (and 6 other seizure actions against Ayds candy). Default decrees of condemnation. Portion of product ordered destroyed. Re- mainder ordered distributed to charitable institutions. (F. D. C. Nos. 2334, 3162, 3600, 3601, -3670, 3999, 4752. Sample Nos. 15617-B, 27514-B, 29201-E, 29202-B, 33794-B, 35926-E, 35935-B.) The labeling of this product bore false and misleading representations regard- ing its efficacy as a reducing agent. Between July 11, 1940, and May 23, 1941, the United States attorneys for the Eastern District of Arkansas, District of New Jersey, Southern District of Ohio, and the Southern District of Alabama filed libels against 73 packages of Ayds candy at Little Rock, Ark., 37 boxes at Elizabeth, N. J., 160 various sized boxes at Cincinnati, Ohio, and 97 various sized boxes at Mobile, Ala., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce within the period from on or about May 4 to on or about December 10,1940, by the Carlay Co., Fuller Labora- tories, or Fuller Co. from Chicago, Ill.; and charging that it was misbranded. The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the name "Ayds," the designs of slender female figures, designs of slender female figures superimposed on obese female figures, a picture entitled "Before," showing obese woman and one entitled "After," showing, presumably, the same individual after having lost 40 pounds, and a poster with picture of a female figure with the words underneath "Now Weighs 130 Lbs. Weighed 160 Lbs.," appearing in the labeling of the various lots, together with statements in circulars accompanying the various shipments, were false and misleading since the said words, designs, pictures and statements created the impression in the mind of the reader that the article, when used as directed and in conjunction with and as a part of the so-called plans referred to in the circulars as No. 1 Plan and No. 2 Plan, would because of its composition and characteristics, be of substantial value in reducing body weight; that it would aid the consumer to reduce pleasantly and without effort; and would aid the consumer to keep the weight down after hav- ing reduced to the desired weight and that it would aid the consumer to cut down on the amount of food eaten without feeling pangs of hunger, distress, faintness or debilitation; whereas it would not be efficacious for the purposes suggested. The article, with the exception of one lot, was also alleged to be misbranded in violation of the provisions of the law applicable to drugs, as reported in D. D. N. J. No. 592. Within the period from September 20,1940 to August 19,1941, no claimant hav- ing appeared, judgments of condemnation were entered and those lots located at Cincinnati and Mobile were ordered distributed to various charitable institu- tions, and the remaining lots were ordered destroyed.