1879. Misbranding of Golden Brand Soi-Jus  (soya oil).    17. S. v. 42 Cans and 33
Cans of Soi-Jus, and a number of circulars.   Default decree of condemna-
tion and destruction.    (F. D. C. No. 18667.   Sample No. 36678-H.)
LIBEL FILED :   December 28,1945, Western District of Washington.
ALLEGED SHIPMENT: On or about January 15, 1942, December 26, 1944, and
January 13 and October 9,1945, by the Soi-Jus Co., from Chicago, 111.
PRODUCT : 42 1-pint cans and 33 1-quart cans of Soi-Jus at Seattle, Wash.,
together with a number of circulars entitled "Drink Golden Brand Soi-Jus."
Examination showed that the product consisted essentially of soybean oil.
LABEL, IN PART:    (Can) "Golden Brand Soi-Jus   *    *    *    a Good Source for:
Phospholipid :-lecithin and cephalin; Non-saturates-linoleic and linolenic acids ;
' Sterols-   *    *    *   It is pressed    *    *    *    to preserve the essential and pro-
tective food factors contained in the soya oil."
NATURE OF CHARGE: Misbranding, Section 502 (a), certain statements on the
can label and in accompanying circulars were false and misleading since they
represented and suggested that the article contained rare nutritional factors
such as phospholipins, nonsaturated fatty acids, and sterols that are not
readily available from common foods; that those substances are essential to
maintain normal nutrition and are of special value in maintaining proper func-
tioning of all living tissues, including the brain, heart, muscles, kidneys, boner
marrow, and liver; that the article would supply substances of special value in
hormone production; that it was a nutritionally significant source of vitamins
D, E, F, and K; and that the article was nonfattening. The article did not
contain rare nutritional factprs, and such substances as phospholipins and non-
saturated fatty acids and sterols are found in abundant quantities in a wide
variety of common foods. The article would not supply substances of special
value in hormone production, and it would be a nutritionally insignificant
source of vitamins D, E, F, and K.   Furthermore, it was fattening.
The article was also alleged to be misbranded under the provisions of the law
applicable to foods, as reported in notices of judgment on foods.
DISPOSITION : March 25, 1946. No claimant having appeared, judgment of con-
demnation was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.