FTC Demands Company Stop Cancer Claims

WASHINGTONThe herbal products company Daniel Chapter One (DCO) and its principal, James Feijo, are facing civil penalties from U.S. Department of Justice that require them to stop making deceptive claims on the companys daily radio show and website about the supposed cancer-fighting properties of its supplements. The civil penalty, which came per the Federal Trade Commissions (FTC) request, said Feijo and the company violated an FTC Order and requires DCO and Feijo to send a notice to purchasers explaining the FTCs findings that the advertisements were unsubstantiated, as required by the FTC Order.  

The complaint against DCO and Feijo stems from a lawsuit that began in September 2008 as part of Operation False Cures," a law enforcement sweep aimed at peddlers of phony cancer remedies.   

FTC said Daniel Chapter One and Feijo deceptively advertised that four dietary supplementsBioShark, 7 Herb Formula, GDU and BioMixxinhibited tumor formation or growth, eliminated tumors, treated or cured cancer, or healed the effects of radiation or chemotherapy. An administrative trial took place in April 2009, and the Administrative Law Judge found that the defendants were making deceptive claims. The Commission upheld the ALJs initial decision in December 2009.

As part of the FTC Order issued in December 2009, Daniel Chapter One and Feijo were required to stop making the deceptive claims, and to send a notice to purchasers explaining the FTCs findings that advertising claims for the supplements were unsubstantiated, and that consumers should consult with health care providers before using any herbal product, to ensure that all aspects of their medical treatment work together.

In March 2010, DCO and Feijo petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to review the FTC ruling that the defendants were making deceptive claims. In December 2010, the appellate court ruled in favor of the FTC. The Court of Appeals found that the Commission did not exceed its authority by requiring a reasonable basis for the defendants claims, and that the defendants legal arguments based on the right to freedom of religion were wholly without merit." The appellate court finalized its denial of the appeal on February 28, 2011.

The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia had stayed the contempt case pending resolution of the defendants appeal, and then lifted the stay on March 7, 2011. The DOJ therefore resumed its efforts and refiled its motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the defendants from continuing to violate the Order on March 11, 2011.

The Commission vote to refer the civil penalty complaint to the Department of Justice for filing was 5-0.