1129. Misbranding of Hayden's Caramelized Wheat Germ.    17. S. v. 14% Cases
of Wheat Germ.    Decree ordering destruction of the product.     (F. D. C.
No. 10394.    Sample No. 48103-F;)
On August 13, 1943, the United States attorney for the Southern District of
Ohio filed a libel against 14? cases, each containing 1 dozen 10-ounce packages,
of wheat germ at Athens, Ohio, alleging that the article had been shipped in
interstate commerce on or about May 11, 1943, by the Hayden Flour Mills, Inc.,
Tecumseh, Mich.; and charging that it was misbranded. The article was labeled
in part: "Hayden's Caramelized Wheat Germ."
The article was alleged to be misbranded because of false and misleading
statements appearing in its labeling which represented that it takes about 300
pounds of wheat to produce 1 pound of the article; that the product would be
efficacious in the treatment of constipation, arthritis, poor appetite, retarded
growth, lowered vitality, nervousness, poor digestion, gray hair, degeneration
of the nervous system, enlargement of the heart, atrophy of the muscles, loss
of appetite, stomach ulcer, loss of weight, failure to grow, neuritis, eczema,
and nervousness; that it would build resistance; that it contained blood-building
minerals; that it would help restore the normal peristaltic action of the intes-
tines and would stimulate the appetite, put pep in the step, help convert the food
into energy, aid digestion, promote general health, bring about steadier nerves,
stimulate normal growth in infants and children, and help children put on
weight and grow faster; that it constituted.an essential part of the diet of all
children; that it would increase resistance to colds and infections; that it was
especially beneficial to nursing mothers; and that it would help prevent bald-
ness and gray hair and cause gray hair to grow in its natural color at the
roots. Consumption of the product would not effect the results claimed or
suggested; and 1 pound of the product did not represent the wheat germ con-
tent of 300 pounds of wheat.
The article was also charged to be misbrandea under the provisions of the
law applicable to food as reported in notices of judgment on food, No. 5785.
On October 1, 1943, no claimant having appeared, judgment was entered order-
ing that the product be destroyed. .