359. Misbranding: of Ancestral Oil.   U. S. v. 33 Packages of Ancestral Oil.   Default
decree of condemnation and destruction.     (F. D. C. No. 2461.    Sample No.
16067-E.)
The labeling of this product bore false and misleading representations regard-
ing its efficacy in the conditions indicated hereinafter. Its labeling also failed to
bear an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents and the common or
usual names of the active ingredients. The product was also deceptively
packaged. It was packed in a thick-walled panel bottle with rather a long neck
which was contained in a carton, creating the impression that a larger volume of
the liquid was furnished than was actually the case.
On or about August 6, 1940, the United States attorney for the Western Dis-
trict of Missouri filed a libel against 33 packages of Ancestral Oil at Kansas City,
Mo., alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate commerce on or about
April 26, 1940, by the Ancestral Medicine Co. from Osawatomie, Kans.; and
charging that it was misbranded.
Analysis showed that the article consisted essentially of a fish oil and turpentine.
The article was alleged to be misbranded in that the labeling bore representa-
tions that it was efficacious in the treatment of piles, rheumatism, hay fever, lum-
bago, earache, coughs, asthma, kidney affections, croup, whooping cough, influenza,
dysentery, and bloody diarrhea, phthisis, pneumonia, bronchitis and sore throat,
for inflammation of the breasts, neuralgia, lumbago, soreness of corns and
bunions, toothache, vaginal discharge or ulcers, diphtheria, lung troubles, burn
or scald, cuts, bruises, or sprains, that it would not blister or irritate the tenderest
skin; that it would penetrate, heal, and cure; that it was efficacious for the
kidneys; would allay various forms of inflammation and pleurisy; would cut
phlegm, prevent a scar; that it was the most beneficial remedy for all ailments
the human family was heir to; that it was the best all-purpose remedy for
garget or caked udder, inflammation of the udder, and that it was excellent for
horses and would be efficacious in the treatment of all flesh wounds, which repre-
sentations were false and misleading since the article would not be efficacious for
such purposes. It was alleged to be misbranded further in that the label did not
bear an accurate statement of the quantity of the contents and did not bear the
common or usual name of the active ingredients. It was alleged to be misbranded
further in that the containers were so made, formed, or filled as to be misleading.
On November 25, 1940, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemna-
tion was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.