1907. Misbranding of Goodfreed's Formula No. 2 and Goodfreed's Inhalers.   IT. S.
v. 1,000 Bottles of Goodfreed's Formula No. 2, 2,000 Goodfreed's In-
halers, and a number of circulars and placards. Default decree of con-
demnation and destruction.    (F. D. C. No. 19319.    Sample No. 2988-H.)
LIBEL FILED: March 6, 1946, District of Columbia. The products were on the
premises of the G. C. Murphy Co., Washington, D. C, in custody of B. L. Good-
man, who represented himself to be a demonstrator and part owner of the
business of Goodfreed Products, the packer and distributor.
PRODUCT: 300 2-ounce bottles, 300 4-ounce bottles, and 400 8-ounce bottles of
Goodf reed's Formula No. 2 and 2,000 Goodf reed's Inhalers at the G. C. Murphy
Co., "Washington, D. C, together with a number of circulars entitled "Good-
freed's Formula Australian Oil Brings Quick Relief to Thousands," a placard
entitled "Formula No. 2 Marvelous Aid," and a placard entitled "Formula
No. 2 Marvelous Relief." Examination indicated that the Formula was a
mixture of volatile oils; and that the Inhaler was a glass tube containing ab-
sorbent material, with one end narrow to allow insertion into the nostrils. In
addition to the representations in the labeling, oral representations were made
on behalf of the manufacturer or packer of the products by B. L. Goodman to
customers at the G. C. Murphy Co. It was represented orally that the products
would be useful in prophylaxis against lobar pneumonia, asthma, ulcers,
catarrh in the stomach, and colds in the kidneys; and that they would be
useful as a treatment for pyorrhea, bleeding gums, and for lumbago, arthritis,
neuritis, rheumatic or muscular fever, and aches and pains of any kind.
LABEL, IN PABT: "Goodfreed's Formula No. 2 Contains: Eucalyptus Oil, Cam-
phor Oil, Peppermint Oil, Menthol and Thymol."
NATURE OF CHARGE: Misbranding, Section 502 (a), certain statements in the
circulars and placards were false and misleading since they represented and
suggested that the articles would be effective in the treatment of asthma,
catarrhal conditions, malaria, yellow fever, endemic fever, stiff joints, earache
and pain, rose fever, hay fever, sinus trouble, bronchitis, coughs due to chest
colds, rheumatic pains, lumbago, sciatica, swollen joints, arthritis, and
neuritis; and that the articles would be effective as an active partner in the
business of keeping well. The articles would not be effective for such purposes.
Further misbranding, Section 502 (f) (1), the labeling of the articles failed
to bear adequate directions for use in the treatment of rose fever, hay fever,
sinus trouble, catarrh, asthma* bronchitis, pyorrhea, bleeding gums, rheumatic
pains, lumbago, sciatica, swollen joints, arthritis, neuritis, stiff joints, earache,
malaria, yellow fever, endemic fever, and in the prophylaxis of lobar pneu-
monia,; ulcers, catarrh in the stomach, and colds in the kidneys, which were the
diseases, symptoms, and conditions for which the articles were offered in their
labeling and in their advertising disseminated and sponsored by and on behalf
of their manufacturer or packer.
DISPOSITION : April 15, 1946. No claimant having appeared, judgment of con-
demnation was entered and the products and the printed matter were ordered
destroyed. On May 1,1946, the decree was amended to provide for the delivery
to the Food and Drug Administration of the circulars^ placards, and the
stickers attached to shipping cartons.