Nutrition 21 seeks court decision
summary judgment on its suit against InterHealth Nutraceuticals,
which it alleges uses misleading advertising for its chromium
products.
Chromium picolinate supplier Nutrition 21 has filed a motion in the Federal District Court in New York for a partial summary judgment against InterHealth Nutraceuticals.
The motion alleges that InterHealth has in six separate instances made false advertising statements.
"Nutrition 21 has made a substantial investment in peer-reviewed published research," said Gail Montgomery, president and CEO of Nutrition 21. It is important that we defend our product claims and the reputation of the scientists and the institutions with which we conduct our research."
"From a dietary supplement industry perspective, we believe companies must work together to maintain higher standards of scientific accuracy and integrity, or be vulnerable to media and regulatory criticism. We must have zero tolerance for any false or misleading information that further contributes to consumer confusion in the marketplace," added Montgomery.
Her remarks echoed the CRN address given earlier this week, which called for the industry to take responsibility for accurate health claims and consumer perception of the nutrition industry.
On April 28, 2003, Nutrition 21 filed an action for false and misleading advertising and for damages against InterHealth in the Federal Court in New York. The complaint alleges that InterHealth's advertising has been misleading customers and consumers by claiming that ChromeMate chromium nicotinate is safer and more bioavailable than Chromax chromium picolinate, and that Nutrition 21 has been damaged by this advertising.
Nutrition 21 claims its Chromax chromium picolinate is the leading and most extensively researched brand of chromium, with 40 clinical trials demonstrating its safety and efficacy for insulin resistance associated with diabetes, obesity, cardiovascular disease and atypical depression.
