Health Product Scam

Case:

State of Minnesota,
by its Attorney General,
Hubert H. Humphrey III,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Carolyn McClendon,

Defendant.

VENUE

5.   Venue is proper in Ramsey County pursuant to Minn. Stat.
(1994) because plaintiff’s cause of action arose in part
in Ramsey County.

FACTS

6.   Defendant offers a health  product named “Vitalium Plus”
for  sale  to  consumers.    This  product  contains  germanium
sesquioxide (also known as  “germanium”), a bio-available form of
the trace mineral germanium;  and  feverfew,  an herb.  Defendant
advertises a key ingredient of this product, “Germanium,” through
CompuServe, an on-line computer communication service.

7.   In the on-line advertisement referred to in paragraph 6,
above (attached as Exhibit A), and in materials subsequently sent
through  the  United  States  mail,  by  defendant  to consumers,
defendant makes  false,  fraudulent,  misleading,  incomplete and
unsubstantiated claims about  the  health  benefits of Germanium,
including, but not limited to, the following:

- 2 -

a. Germanium  has   powerful  antioxidant  properties,
helping fortify, protect,  and  strengthen  the cells against
harmful free radicals;

b.   Germanium  greatly   increases  tissue  oxygenation
throughout the body;

c.   Germanium works with oxygen to maximize cell
through its specialized electron  transfer ability, making
it an excellent energy booster;

d.   Germanium is an effective pain reliever;

e.   Germanium  has  been  studied  in  clinical  trials

involving  medical  diseases   and  conditions  that  include

rheumatoid  arthritis,   cancer,   asthma,   diabetes,  liver

disease, cardiac  disorders,  eye  diseases, headaches, heavy

metal  toxicity,  osteoporosis,   chronic  fatigue  syndrome,

candida yeast infections, hepatitis, digestive disorders, and

ces chosen to be studied as a treatment for AIDS.

8.   Defendant lacks adequate substantiation  for each of the
claims in paragraph 7,  specifically  with respect to defendant’s
claims regarding  studies  about  Germanium’s  effect  on certain
diseases.  Such  claims  are  misleading  because they imply that
persons with  AIDS  and  the  other  diseases  listed  above, may
benefit from taking Germanium, when  in fact there is no adequate
substantiation for these claims,  and  when in fact Germanium may
be harmful in that it may cause irreversible kidney damage.

9.   Further, defendant fails to disclose to potential buyers
of the product the material fact that  there is an FDA ban on the
import of Germanium due  to  health  concerns, and that Germanium
may cause irreversible kidney damage.

COUNT ONE

10.  Plaintiff  realleges   the   allegations   contained  in
paragraphs 1 through 9.

11.  The Deceptive Trade Practices Act provides in part:

A person engages in a  deceptive trade practice, when in
the course  of  business,  vocation,  or occupation, the
person:

(5) represents that goods  or services have sponsorship,
approval, characteristics,  ingredients, uses, benefits,
or quantities that they do not have . . . or

(13)  engages  in  any  other  conduct  which  similarly
creates a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding.

12.  By  making  unsubstantiated  representations  about  the

health  benefits  of  “Germanium,”  and  by  failing  to disclose
material information about the  product, defendant has engaged in
multiple violations of the Deceptive  Trade Practices Act,  Minn.
Stat.

COUNT TWO

13.  Plaintiff  realleges   the   allegations   contained  in
paragraphs 1 through 12.

14.  The False  Statement  in  Advertisement  Act provides in
part:

Any person, firm, corporation,  or association who, with
intent to  sell  or  in  anyway  dispose of merchandise,
securities, service, or anything offered by such person,
firm,   corporation,   or   association,   directly   or
indirectly, to the public,  for sale or distribution, or

with intent to increase  the  consumption thereof, or to
induce the  public  in  any  manner  to  enter  into any
obligation  relating  thereto,  . . .  makes, publishes,
disseminates, circulates, or  places  before the public,
or causes directly or indirectly, to be made, published,
disseminated, circulated, or  placed  before the public,
in this  state,  in  a  newspaper  or other publication,
. . . or in any other  way, an advertisement of any sort
regarding merchandise,  securities,  service or anything
so offered to the public, for use, consumption, purchase
or  sale,  which  advertisement  contains  any  material
assertion, representation, or statement of fact which is
untrue, deceptive, or misleading,  shall, whether or not
pecuniary or other specific  damage to any person occurs
as a direct result thereof,  be guilty of a misdemeanor,
and any such act is declared to be a public nuisance and
may be enjoined as such.

15.  By placing before Minnesota consumers false, fraudulent,
and misleading advertisements  about  “Germanium” via CompuServe,
and through  the  U.S.  mails,  defendant  has committed multiple
violations of Minn. Stat. { 325F.67 (1994).

COUNT THREE

16.  Plaintiff  realleentation,
misleading statement  or  deceptive  practice,  with the
intent that others rely  thereon  in connection with the
sale of any merchandise,  whether  or not any person has
in fact been  misled,  deceived,  or damaged thereby, is
enjoinable as provided herein.

18.  By making unsubstantiated  claims regarding the supposed
health  benefits  of  “Germanium,”  and  by  failing  to disclose
material  information  about  the  product,  defendant  committed
multiple  violations  of  the  Consumer  Fraud  Act,  Minn. Stat.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for  judgment against defendant as

follows:

I.   Declaring that  defendant’s  conduct  as described above
violates  the  Deceptive   Trade   Practices   Act,  Minn.  Stat.
{ 325D.44, subd. 1 (1994),  the  False Statement in Advertisement
Act, Minn. Stat. { 325F.67  (1994),  and  the Consumer Fraud Act,
Minn. Stat. { 325F.69, subd. 1 (1994).

II.  Enjoining   defendant   and   her   employees,   agents,
successors, and assigns from engaging in the violations mentioned
above.

III. Enjoining   defendant   and   her   employees,   agents,
successors, and assigns from  making any false or unsubstantiated
representations to  consumers  regarding  the  health benefits of
“Germanium.”

IV.  Requiring  defendant  to   disclose   to  consumers  all
material information about “Germanium,” including but not limited
to, information about the FDA  ban  on the import of “Germanium,”
and the health risks related with taking “Germanium.”

V.   Requiring defendant to make restitution to all consumers

injured as a result of  defendant’s  conduct as described in this
complaint and awarding redress and such other relief as the Court
finds necessary  to  remedy  injury  to  consumers resulting from
defendant’s  violations  of   the  consumer  protection  statutes
identified in this complaint.

VI.  Awarding plaintiff civil  penalties against defendant in
the amount of $25,000 each  per  violation  of law as provided in
Minn. Stat. { 8.31, subds. 1 and 3 (1994).

VII. Granting such other  legal  or  equitable relief as this
Court deems  just  and  proper,  together  with  judgment against
defendant for investigative  costs, disbursements, and reasonable
attorney’s fees incurred on behalf of plaintiff.

 Mail this post

Posted under Other Scams

This post was written by admin on December 18, 2008

Leave a Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Comments

More Blog Post