886. Misbranding: of Gluococinine.    TJ. S. v. Eric M. Boehnke   (Ericus Products
Co.).   Plea of guilty.   Defendant given suspended sentence of 1 year and
placed on probation for 2 years.    (F. D. C. No. 7252.    Sample No. 47691-E.)
On April 3, 1943, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New
York filed an information against Eric M. Boehnke, trading as the Ericus Products
Co., at Jamaica, N. Y., alleging shipment on or about December 11, 1941, from the
State of New York into the State of Illinois of a quantity of Glucocinine which
was misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article showed that it consisted essentially of
powdered plant tissues, including starch.
It was alleged to be misbranded in that certain statements appearing in the
labeling were false and misleading in that they represented and suggested that
the articles would be efficacious in the treatment of mild and medium cases of dia-
betes mellitus, that it would be efficacious to build up the pancreas gland (islets of
Langerhans), that it would bring about gradual but lasting alleviation of diabetes;
that its use would prevent constitutional breakdown and gangrene in diabetes, that
it was more valuable than insulin in the treatment of diabetes, that it would act
beneficially on the pancreas and would stimulate the pancreas gland to produce
insulin of its own, and that by its use the diabetic could be more liberal in his
diet and the tolerance of diabetics for carbohydrates would become greater and
greater, whereas it would not be efficacious for such purposes.
It was alleged to be misbranded further in that the statements: "Glycocinine
(Vegetable Insulin)," "The medical treatment as a whole in diabetes is for the
most part unsatisfactory, unbiological and unscientific," "Honest and conscientious
physicians have dropped it for mild and medium cases long ago," "Glucocinine
(Plant Insulin) * * * Unlike regular insulin it has the exceptional quality of
being able to be administered orally and still retain its full effectiveness. Indeed,
it works more slowly than Insulin, but its results are much more permanent and
hence more valuable. * * * in short the chief differences between Insulin
and Glucocinine are these:-Insulin (important for first aid in severe cases) brings
quick results but is habitual and by using it continuously the disease usually pro-
gresses. Whereas Glucocinine, on the other hand, works slowly but surely by
which the progress of the disease recedes more and more and the tolerance for
carbohydrates becomes greater and greater," were false and misleading since the
article was not an insulin-like substance obtained from plants; medical treatment
in diabetes is not for the most part unsatisfactory, unbiological, or unscientific;
honest and conscientious physicians have not dropped insulin for all mild or me-
dium cases of diabetes; the effects resulting from the use of the article were not
permanent and were not more valuable than those resulting from the use of in-
sulin ; and the article did not differ from insulin only in the respects set forth in
the statements aforesaid, but did differ from insulin in the further respect that
insulin has the capacity, property, and power of reducing blood sugar, whereas the
article Glucocinine did not have such capacity, property, or power.
On May 6,1943, the defendant having entered a plea of guilty, the court imposed
a suspended sentence of 1 year and placed the defendant on probation for 2 years.