29009. Adulteration and misbranding of Gauztex. U. S. v. 8 Gross of Gauztex. 
Default decree of condemnation and destruction. (F. & D. No. 41943. 
Sample No. 8611-D.)
This product was represented to be sterile but was unsterile. Furthermore, 
its labeling contained false and fraudulent curative and therapeutic claims.
On March 11, 1938, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
Michigan, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court a libel praying seizure and condemnation of 8 gross of Gauztex 
at Detroit, Mich.; alleging that the article had been shipped in interstate com- 
merce on or about February 8,1938, from Chicago, Ill., by the Gauztex Corpora- 
tion; and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and 
Drugs Act as amended.
Examination of a sample of the article showed that it contained viable aerobic 
and anaerobic or facultative anaerobic micro-organisms.
The article was alleged to be adulterated in that its purity fell below the 
professed standard or quality under which it was sold, namely, (on the car- 
ton) "Sterilized Contains Nothing * * * Injurious" and (on the circular 
enclosed in the package) "Gauztex is sterilized," in that it was not sterile but 
contained viable micro-organisms.
It was alleged to be misbranded in that the statements on the carton, 
"Sterilized Contains Nothing * * * Injurious," "Fully Guaranteed For One 
Tear," "Allows healing circulation of air," and "It is safe," and the statements 
on the circular, "Surgical gauze," "With Gauztex it is easy to protect all cuts 
or other injuries—large or small," "Gauztex protects the wound thoroughly," 
and "Gauztex is sterilized—safe to use," were false and misleading since they 
represented that the article was sterile; whereas it was not sterile but contained 
viable micro-organisms.
Misbranding was alleged further in that the following statements appearing 
in the labeling falsely and fraudulently represented the curative and thera- 
peutic effectiveness of the article since it contained no ingredient or combi- 
nation of ingredients capable of producing the effect claimed: (Carton) "Allows 
healing circulation of air," "It is safe"; (circular) "Safe * * * surgical 
gauze * * * With Gauztex it is easy to protect all cuts or other injuries— 
large or small.    *    *    *   Eandage directly over small cuts, scratches or burns
with Gauztex. If a wound is large and bleeding freely, * * * If sterile 
gauze is not available, bandage  directly  over  the  wound  with  Gauztex to
* * * protect it. Gauztex protects the wound thoroughly * * * pro- 
moting more rapid healing * * * wind Gauztex on to the finger. Cover 
wound with two or more turns * * * for nnger-tip injuries, * * * How 
many  times  the  children  come  to  Mother   with  skinned  knees   and   elbows
* * * cuts, burns and scratches! How much better they like to have you 
use Gauztex   *   *   *   Gauztex is sterilized—safe to use."
On June 13, 1938, no claimant having appeared, judgment of condemnation 
was entered and the product was ordered destroyed.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.