Last week, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charged POM Wonderful, the maker of a brand of pomegranate juice, with making unsubstantiated health claims about its products.
The federal agency said the juice and supplements firm made "false and unsubstantiated claims that their products will prevent or treat heart disease, prostate cancer, and erectile dysfunction." The complaint says the company "violated federal law by making deceptive disease prevention and treatment claims" with ads in the New York Times and other publications and on the Internet.
In an editorial published by the LA Times, Michael Hiltzik takes a closer look at POM's reactions to the charge, as well as the scientific research, which was funded by the company, behind the health claims.
It is not surprising that the people at POM are outraged by the charge and content that the federal government is infringing on their right of free speech.
The most interesting part of the editorial is perhaps POM's assertion that the company owner's (Lynda Resnick) statements about the product should not be taken as an "advertisement" and that since they were made in an interview, they are none of the FTC's business.
According to POM, Resnick is "talking about what she personally believes with respect to the science that she's seen. ... Lynda's not a doctor, she's not offering scientific opinion; she's speaking ... as an individual from the heart about what she believes."
A company generally cannot have someone say something for the company that it cannot say under FTC or FDA regulations. Like Mr. Hiltzik, I am interested in seeing whether POM Wonderful can make that argument stick with the FTC.
