1998. Misbranding: of Knox-It, Flex-O Udder Ointment, and Flex-O Seourene.
TJ. S. v. 88 Packages of Knox-It, 114 Cans of Flex-O Udder Ointment, and
77 Packages of Flex-O Seourene. Default decree of forfeiture and de-
struction.     (F. D. C. No. 21012.    Sample Nos. 19660-H to 19662-H, incl.)
LIBEL FILED :    September 19,1946, Western District of Wisconsin.
ALLEGED SHIPMENT : On or about March 9 and April 3, 1945, and March 12, 1946,
by the Dairy Remedies Co., from Montclair, N. J.
PRODUCT : 88 packages of Knox-It, 114 Cans of Flex-O Udder Ointment, and 77
packages of Flex-O Seourene at Monroe, Wis. Analysis of samples of the
articles showed that the Knox-It consisted essentially of nitrogenous plant
material, including starch, sulfur, iodine, iodoform, and formaldehyde com-
pound, with small amounts of copper sulfate and lime; that the Flex-O Udder
Ointment consisted essentially of petrolatum, with small amounts of winter-
green, oil, mustard oil, turpentine, and a red coloring matter; and that the
Flex-O Seourene consisted of a white powder containing essentially calcium
carbonate, sodium, zinc, and calcium phenolsulfonates.
NATURE OF CHARGE: Knox-It. Misbranding, Section 502 (a), the designation
"Knox-It" and certain label statements were false and misleading since they
represented and suggested that the article would be effective in the treatment   _
of disturbances of the mammary system of dairy cattle; that it would be/
effective to build up resistance of the animals to prevent any disturbance of V
the mammary system; and that the Flex-0 Udder Ointment would be effective
to assist the healthy milk secretion and flow of blood to the udder.
Flex-0 Udder Ointment. Misbranding, Section 502 (a), certain label state-
ments were false and misleading since they represented and suggested that the
article would be effective in the treatment of disease conditions of the udder
of cows.
Flex-0 Scourene. Misbranding, Section 502 (a), the designation "Scourene"
and certain label statements were false and misleading since they represented
and suggested that the article would be effective for the disease condition of
animals known as scours; that it would be effective as an astringent medica-
tion for intestinal derangements of farm and dairy animals; that it would be
effective for intestinal infections in farm animals; that it would be effective as
an astringent; and that it would be effective in the treatment of simple scours in
calves, colts, pigs, dogs, and lambs, or where such contagion exists among
fowls.
The articles would not be effective for the purposes claimed.
DISPOSITION :   January 21, 1947.    No claimant having appeared, judgment of
forfeiture was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.
DRUGS ACTIONABLE BECAUSE OF  OMISSION OF, OR
UNSATISFACTORY, INGREDIENTS STATEMENTS*