33092 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2001 / Notices

This proposed order, if issued in final

form, will resolve the claims alleged in

the complaint against the named

respondent. it is not the Commission’s

intent that acceptance of this consent

agreement and issuance of a final

decision and order will release any

claims against any unnamed persons or

entities associated with the conduct

described in the complaint. The purpose

of this analysis is to facilitate public

comment on the proposed order, and is

not intended to constitute an official

interpretation of the agreement and

proposed to order or to modify in any

way their terms.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–15549 Filed 6–19–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[File No. 002 3098]

MaxCell BioScience, Inc., et al.;

Analysis To Aid Public Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed consent agreement.

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this

matter settles alleged violations of

federal law prohibiting unfair or

deceptive acts or practices or unfair

methods of competition. The attached

Analysis to Aid Public Comment

describes both the allegations in the

complaint that accompanies the consent

agreement and terms of the consent

order—embodied in the consent

agreement—that would settle these

allegations.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 16, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,

Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Matthew Daynard, FTC/S–4002, 600

Pennsylvania Ave., NW., Washington,

DC 20580. (202) 326–3291.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.

46 and section 2.34 of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice (16 FR 2.34), notice is

hereby given that the above-captioned

consent agreement containing a consent

order to cease and desist, having been

filed with an accepted by the

Commission, has been placed on the

public record for a period of thirty (30)

days. The following Analysis to Aid

Public Comment describes the terms of

the consent agreement, and the

allegations in the complaint. An

electronic copy of the full text of the

consent agreement package can be

obtained from the FTC Home Page (for

June 14, 2001), on the World Wide Web,

at ‘‘http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/06/

index.htm.’’ A paper copy can be

obtained from the FTC Public Reference

Room, Room H–130, 600 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580,

either in person or by calling (202) 326–

3627.

Public comment is invited. Comments

should be directed to: FTC/Office of the

Secretary, Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20580. Two

paper copies of each comments should

be filed, and should be accompanied, if

possible, by a 31⁄2 inch diskette

containing an electronic copy of the

comment. Such comments or views will

be considered by the Commission and

will be available for inspection and

copying at its principal office in

accordance with section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of

the Commission’s Rules of Practice (16

CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order to

Aid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission has

accepted, subject to final approval, an

agreement containing a consent order

from MaxCell BioScience, Inc. and

Stephen Cherniske, president of the

corporation (collectively, ‘‘MaxCell’’).

The proposed consent order has been

placed on the public record for thirty

(30) days for receipt of comments by

interested persons. Comments received

during this period will become part of

the public record. After thirty (30) days,

the Commission will again review the

agreement and the comments received,

and will decide whether it should

withdraw from the agreement or make

final the agreement’s proposed order.

This matter involves alleged

misleading representations about

Longevity Signal Formula (‘‘LSF’’), a

dietary supplement containing, among

other ingredients, arginine, DHEA, and

7-Keto DHEA, and an Anabolic/

Catabolic IndexTM (‘‘ACI’’) test, an athome (with laboratory analysis) urine

test that measures the ratio of 17-

ketosteroids to creatinine in one urine

sample. This matter concerns allegedly

false and unsubstantiated advertising

claims made in cassette tapes and web

sites distributed directly to consumers

and through distributors regarding the

ability of LSF to reverse the aging

process and, consequently, to prevent,

treat, or cure numerous age-related

diseases and conditions, and the ability

of the ACI test to measure a person’s

overall healthiness and youthfulness

and to prove the effectiveness of LSF for

reversing aging.

According to the FTC complaint,

MaxCell falsely claimed that the ACI

test provides a clinical gauge of an

individual’s overall healthiness or

youthfulness and demonstrates that LSF

prevents or reverses aging. In fact, the

complaint alleges that the ACI test only

measures inactive androgen breakdown

products in the urine, which products,

in most instances, are not a significant

or reliable measure of overall

healthiness or youthfulness. The

complaint further alleges that MaxCell

falsely claimed that scientific testing

demonstrates the ability of LSF to:

Significantly reduce the risk of

atherosclerosis; increase bone density,

improve glucose tolerance, reduce body

fat, increase muscle mass, and increase

growth hormone levels in postmenopausal women; improve liver

function; and significantly increase life

expectancy.

In addition, the complaint challenges

claims that LSF: Significantly reduces

the risk of atherosclerosis; cures

arthritis; lowers blood pressure;

significantly lowers cholesterol levels in

the bloodstream; strengthens bones;

reduces or eliminates the need for

corrective eyewear; promotes significant

weight loss and muscle gain without

dieting or exercise; increases glucose

tolerance; increases Growth Hormone

levels in the body, thereby causing

positive clinical effects on health;

improves liver function; prevents or

reverses aging; and significantly

increases life expectancy. The

complaint alleges that these claims are

unsubstantiated.

Finally, the complaint charges that

MaxCell, by providing advertisements

and promotional materials to

distributors for use in their marketing

and sale of LSF and the ACI test, have

provided means and instrumentalities to

distributors of MaxCell’s products in

furtherance of the deceptive and

misleading acts or practices alleged in

the complaint.

The proposed consent order contains

provisions designed to prevent MaxCell

and its distributors from engaging in

similar acts and practices in the future

and to redress consumer injury by

requiring MaxCell to make a monetary

payment to the Commission.

Part I of the order bans claims that the

ACI Test or any other substantially

similar device provides a clinical gauge

of an individual’s overall healthiness or

youthfulness. ‘‘Substantially similar

device’’ is defined as any product that

measures the ratio of 17-ketosteroids to

creatinine in one urine sample.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 119 / Wednesday, June 20, 2001 / Notices 33093

Part II of the order requires that future

claims that any test or device provides

a clinical gauge of an individual’s

overall healthiness or youthfulness be

true and substantiated by competent

and reliable scientific evidence.

Part III of the order requires

competent and reliable scientific

evidence as substantiation for future

claims that LSF or any other food, drug,

device, service, or dietary supplement

provides any of the specific health

benefits challenged above as

unsubstantiated. In addition, Part III. L

requires scientific substantiation for any

future claim about the effect of covered

products or services on any disease, on

the structure or function of the human

body, or about any other health benefit,

or the safety, of any covered product or

service.

Part IV of the order prohibits MaxCell

from providing to any person or entity

‘‘means and instrumentalities’’ that

contain any claim about the effect of any

product or service on any disease, or

about the effect of any product or

service on the structure or function of

the human body, or about any other

health benefit, or the safety, of any

product or service, unless such claim is

true and substantiated by competent

and reliable scientific evidence. ‘‘Means

and instrumentalities’’ is defined as any

information, including but not

necessarily limited to any advertising,

labeling, or promotional materials, for

use by distributors in their marketing or

sale of the ACI test or LSF or any other

product or service covered under the

order.

Part V of the order prohibits MaxCell

from misrepresenting the existence,

contents, validity, results, conclusions,

or interpretations of any test, study, or

research.

Part VI of the order requires

dissemination of a notice (‘‘Attachment

A’’) about the order to MaxCell’s

distributors who have purchased the

ACI Test or LSF since January 1, 2000.

This notice indicates that MaxCell has

agreed to cease making challenged

representations, and warns distributors

that they may be terminated if they do

not conform their representations to the

requirements placed on MaxCell.

Part VII of the order requires

dissemination of Attachment A to future

distributors, and that MaxCell monitor

their distributors, and terminate sales to

distributors who make representations

prohibited by the order.

Part VIII of the order permits FDAapproved drug claims and claims for

food or dietary supplements authorized

under the Nutrition Labeling and

Education Act of 1990.

Part IX of the order requires that

MaxCell make a payment of $150,000 to

the Commission, which funds the FTC

can forward to the U.S. Treasury as

disgorgement or use for purposes of

consumer redress.

Parts X, XI, XII, and XIV of the order

require MaxCell to keep copies of

relevant advertisements and materials

substantiating claims made in the

advertisements, to provide copies of the

order to certain of its personnel, to

notify the Commission of changes in

corporate structure, and to file

compliance reports with the

Commission. Part XIII requires Stephen

Cherniske to notify the Commission of

his employment status, and Part XV

provides that the order will terminate

after twenty (20) years under certain

circumstances.

The purpose of this analysis is to

facilitate public comment on the

proposed order, and it is not intended

to constitute an official interpretation of

the agreement and proposed order or to

modify in any way their terms.

By direction of the Commission.

Donald S. Clark,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01–15548 Filed 6–19–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6750–01–M

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

[File No. 002 3229]

Panda Herbal International, Inc., et al.;

Analysis to Aid Public Comment

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Proposed Consent Agreement.

SUMMARY: The consent agreement in this

matter settles alleged violations of

federal law prohibiting unfair or

deceptive acts or practices or unfair

methods of competition. The attached

Analysis to Aid Public Comment

describes both the allegations in the

complaint that accompanies the consent

agreement and the terms of the consent

order—embodied in the consent

agreement—that would settle these

allegations.

DATES: Comments must be received on

or before July 16, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be

directed to: FTC/Office of the Secretary,

Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW.,

Washington, DC 20580.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Bloom or Donald D’Amato,

Federal Trade Commission, Northeast

Region, One Bowling Green, Suite 318,

New York, NY 10004. (212) 607–2801 or

607–2802.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to section 6(f) of the Federal Trade

Commission Act, 38 Stat. 721, 15 U.S.C.

46 and section 2.34 of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice (16 CFR 2.34), notice

is hereby given that the above-captioned

consent agreement containing a consent

order to cease and desist, having been

filed with and accepted by the

Commission, has been placed on the

public record for a period of thirty (30)

days. The following Analysis to Aid

Public Comment describes the terms of

the consent agreement, and the

allegations in the complaint. An

electronic copy of the full text of the

consent agreement package can be

obtained from the FTC Home Page (for

June 14, 2001), on the World Wide Web,

at ‘‘http://www.ftc.gov/os/2001/06/

index.htm.’’ A paper copy can be

obtained from the FTC Public Reference

Room, Room H–130, 600 Pennsylvania

Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20580,

either in person or by calling (202) 326–

3627.

Public comment is invited. Comments

should be directed to: FTC/Office of the

Secretary, Room 159, 600 Pennsylvania

Ave., NW., Washington, DC 20580. Two

paper copies of each comment should

be filed, and should be accompanied, if

possible, by a 31⁄2 inch diskette

containing an electronic copy of the

comment. Such comments or views will

be considered by the Commission and

will be available for inspection and

copying at its principal office in

accordance with section 4.9(b)(6)(ii) of

the Commission’s Rules of Practice (16

CFR 4.9(b)(6)(ii)).

Analysis of Proposed Consent Order To

Aid Public Comment

The Federal Trade Commission has

accepted, subject to final approval, an

agreement to a proposed consent order

from Panda Herbal International, Inc.

(‘‘Panda’’), a corporation, and Everett L.

Farr III, individually and as an officer of

the corporation (‘‘proposed

respondents’’).

The proposed consent order has been

placed on the public record for thirty

(30) days for the receipt of comments by

interested persons. Comments received

during this period will become part of

the public record. After thirty (30) days,

the Commission will again review the

agreement and comments received and

will decide whether it should withdraw

from the agreement and take appropriate

action or make final the agreement’s

proposed order.

This matter involves proposed

respondents’ making of health-related

advertising claims on the Internet and

elsewhere for their Herbal Outlook (a

dietary supplement that contains St.