10695. Misbranding of Allen's IVijara Capsules.   U. S. v. Allen Products Co., Inc.,
and Marion Allen.    Pleas of guilty.    Fine, $75.     (F. D. C. No.  10539.
Sample Nos. 37131-F, 37143-F, 37149-F.)
INFORMATION FILED: March 24, 1945, District of Columbia, against the Allen 
Products Co., Inc., Washington, D. C, and Marion Allen, president of the 
corporation.
ALLEGED SHIPMENT : On or about February 24 and March 23, 1943, within the 
District of Columbia.
PRODUCT: Microscopic examination showed that the product consisted essentially 
of green stem and leaf material, including parsley and water cress.
Vitamin assays showed that each capsule contained less than 5 U. S. P. Units 
of vitamin A, 4.4 micrograms (0.0044 milligram) of thiamine hydrochloride 
(vitamin Bi), 0.5 milligram of vitamin C, less than 4 U. S. P. Units of vitamin 
D, 9 micrograms (0.009 milligram) of riboflavin, and 86 micrograms (0.086 
milligram) of nicotinic acid.
Chemical analysis showed that each capsule contained approximately 4.3 
milligrams of calcium, 3.2 milligrams of phosphorus, and 0.4 milligram of iron. 
NATURE OF CHARGE: Misbranding, Section 403 (a), certain statements in the 
circulars enclosed in the boxes containing the article were false and misleading 
since they represented and created the false impression that the article was a 
new food; that it was a concentrated dietary supplement; and that it would 
supply the body with the essential minerals and vitamins necessary to replace 
bodily mineral and vitamin deficiency, which minerals and vitamins are neces- 
sary to health. The article when used according to directions would supply not 
more than one-fifth of the minimum daily requirements for iron, an inconse- 
quential fruition of the minimum daily requirements of the body for such 
essential vitamins as vitamin A, vitamin Bi, vitamin C, vitamin D, and ribo- 
flavin, and such essential minerals as calcium and phosphorus, and but an 
insignificant amount of nicotinic acid.
Further misbranding, Section 403 (j), the article purported to be and was 
represented for special dietary uses by man by reason of its vitamin and 
mineral properties, and its label did not bear a statement of the dietary 
properties upon which such use was based in whole or in part, including a 
statement showing the presence or absence of specific essential minerals and 
vitamins.
The article was alleged also to be misbranded under the provisions of the 
law applicable to drugs, as reported in notices of judgment on drugs and 
devices, No. 1982.
DISPOSITION: June 22, 3945. Pleas of guilty having been entered on behalf of 
the defendants, the court imposed a total fine of $75.