333. Misbranding of XJtra Jel.    U. S. v. 32 Tubes of Utra Jel.    Default decree of
condemnation and destruction.    (F. D. C. No. 3196.    Sample No. 14082-E.)
This product would be dangerous to health when used as directed in the label-
ing. It would not be efficacious for certain purposes for which it was recom-
mended. It contained no free iodine as claimed, and the retail carton did not
bear the common or usual names of the active ingredients.
On October 14, 1940, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania filed a libel against 32 tubes of Utra Jel at Philadelphia, Pa.,
alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about
August 15, 1940, by Pynosol Laboratories, Inc., from Chicago, HI.; and charging
that it was misbranded.
Analysis showed that the article consisted essentially of water, soap, pine oil,
and combined iodine.   It contained no free iodine.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the following statement in
the labeling was false and misleading since it was not efficacious for the said
purposes: "For Specific and Non-Specific Infections of the Cervix and Cervical
Canal." It was alleged to be misbranded further in that the following statement
appearing in the labeling was false and misleading in that it was incorrect:
(Tube) "Active Ingredients: 1? Iodine." It was alleged to be misbranded
further in that its carton did not bear the common or usual names of the
active ingredients; and in that it was dangerous to health when used in the
dosage, or with the frequency or duration prescribed, recommended, or sug-
gested in the labeling, namely: (Carton) "1 to 5cc injected into cervical canal,
and about 3-5cc applied on wool tampon to be left in position from 12 to 20
hours"; and (tube)  "For Cervical and Intra-Uterine Use."
On November 23, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemna-
tion was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.