Business Blog
(En)force to be reckoned with
Companies that sign settlements with the FTC need to know that those documents contain consumer protection provisions enforceable in court. That’s the message of a motion for contempt just filed against Bayer Corporation by the Department of Justice and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey, with the assistance of the FTC.
The action stems from a massive campaign Bayer runs for Phillips’ Colon Health. Packaging, TV commercials, and print ads – which often feature “The Colon Lady” – expressly claim the product can “defend against” occasional constipation, diarrhea, gas, and bloating. The lawsuit alleges that Bayer's ads imply to consumers that Phillips' Colon Health prevents, treats, and cures those conditions. People spent hundreds of millions on dollars on the product, but according to the complaint, Bayer didn’t have competent and reliable scientific evidence to support those representations.
Standing alone, that would be a serious allegation – but there’s more to the story. In 1991, the FTC filed a lawsuit against Miles, Inc., a predecessor of Bayer, for unsubstantiated claims for One-A-Day multivitamins. That case ended with a settlement requiring the company to have competent and reliable scientific evidence to support representations about One-A-Day.
Then in 2007, the United States filed an action alleging that Bayer had violated the FTC order by making unproven metabolism and weight control claims for One-A-Day WeightSmart. That settlement included a $3.2 million civil penalty and provisions banning misrepresentations about the benefits, performance, efficacy, or safety of any dietary supplement, multivitamin, or weight control product.
The Motion to Show Cause just filed by the Department of Justice alleges that Bayer's unsubstantiated claims for Phillips' Colon Health violate the terms of that 2007 FTC order. The action is pending in federal court in New Jersey.
It is your choice whether to submit a comment. If you do, you must create a user name, or we will not post your comment. The Federal Trade Commission Act authorizes this information collection for purposes of managing online comments. Comments and user names are part of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) public records system, and user names also are part of the FTC’s computer user records system. We may routinely use these records as described in the FTC’s Privacy Act system notices. For more information on how the FTC handles information that we collect, please read our privacy policy.
The purpose of this blog and its comments section is to inform readers about Federal Trade Commission activity, and share information to help them avoid, report, and recover from fraud, scams, and bad business practices. Your thoughts, ideas, and concerns are welcome, and we encourage comments. But keep in mind, this is a moderated blog. We review all comments before they are posted, and we won’t post comments that don’t comply with our commenting policy. We expect commenters to treat each other and the blog writers with respect.
We don't edit comments to remove objectionable content, so please ensure that your comment contains none of the above. The comments posted on this blog become part of the public domain. To protect your privacy and the privacy of other people, please do not include personal information. Opinions in comments that appear in this blog belong to the individuals who expressed them. They do not belong to or represent views of the Federal Trade Commission.