11-10-2008, 09:55 PM | #1 (permalink) |
I love Derf!! Join Date: Mar 12 2002 Location: Undisclosed Secure Location
Posts: 2,636
Rep Power: 26 | Texas v Darque Tan, et al: An unlawful marketing campaign re: Vitamain D Darque Tan Hit With Lawsuit for Vitamin D Claims Last Edited: Monday, 10 Nov 2008, 5:14 PM CST Created: Monday, 10 Nov 2008, 5:08 PM CST HOUSTON -- The operators of a Houston-based tanning salon chain were slapped with a lawsuit after investigators say the company claimed their tanning beds increased body levels of Vitamin D, thus reducing the risk of cancer. Darque Tan, L.L.C., Segler Enterprises, Ltd., company president Robbie Segler and Monica and Jason Jones, who operate two Darque Tan facilities in San Antonio, are charged with conducting an unlawful marketing campaign. The office seeks a refund to misled customers and civil fines up to $20,000 per violation of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, as well as $25,000 per day for each violation of the Health and Safety Code. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbot's Office said company officials violated the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, among other Texas Health and Safety Code laws, after company operators allegedly published advertising materials suggesting their tanning beds produce high levels of Vitamin D, which reduce customers' chances of getting cancer. However, under state and federal law, tanning beds are approved only for cosmetic tanning, officials said. "The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved tanning beds as Vitamin D delivery devices or devices that reduce cancer risks," according to an official statement issued by the attorney general's office. "Any advertisements for these unapproved uses are false and violate state law." MyFox Houston | Darque Tan Hit With Lawsuit for Vitamin D Claims The lawsuit: http://www.woai.com/media/news/c/3/5...quetan_pop.pdf Ad #1. http://www.oag.state.tx.us/media/videos/play.php?image=111008darque1&id=322 Ad #2. http://www.oag.state.tx.us/media/videos/play.php?image=111008darque2&id=322 Last edited by Ezliving_Jim; 11-10-2008 at 10:02 PM. |
11-11-2008, 09:04 AM | #2 (permalink) |
Join Date: May 20 2003
Posts: 9,301
Rep Power: 29 | Re: Texas v Darque Tan, et al: An unlawful marketing campaign re: Vitamain D This is TRUE ENGFANT tactics in action! Make these mutahs come to you if you can't get to them. All they have is some stupid law with ZERO backing and he has plenty of backing for his position. Bravo. |
11-11-2008, 09:16 AM | #3 (permalink) |
I vote for DERF! Join Date: Jan 6 2004 Location: Midwest-ish
Posts: 4,400
Rep Power: 22 | Re: Texas v Darque Tan, et al: An unlawful marketing campaign re: Vitamain D What a joke. I wonder if insurance will cover this somehow? Also I am guessing this is FAR from over with an appeal, etc.
__________________ OMG! I made a post! :) |
11-11-2008, 09:22 AM | #4 (permalink) |
I Love Derf! Who Doesn't? Join Date: Nov 17 2004 Location: Suite B4
Posts: 1,255
Rep Power: 28 | Re: Texas v Darque Tan, et al: An unlawful marketing campaign re: Vitamain D Hey Don -- there's that word "false" we've discussed... "Any advertisements for these unapproved uses are false and violate state law."
__________________ Step In To The Light, While Loving Derf. www.simplytantexas.com |
11-11-2008, 09:32 AM | #6 (permalink) |
Join Date: May 20 2003
Posts: 9,301
Rep Power: 29 | Re: Texas v Darque Tan, et al: An unlawful marketing campaign re: Vitamain D I'll bring the rotting produce to throw at the jerks. Actually there's nothing like hot nacho cheese in the face of a loud mouth regulator to get a point across. |
11-19-2008, 09:05 AM | #10 (permalink) |
I love Derf!! Join Date: Jul 16 2004 Location: NH
Posts: 474
Rep Power: 21 | Re: Texas v Darque Tan, et al: An unlawful marketing campaign re: Vitamain D This suit was first filed April 18th by a law student. named Emily Prewett, she filed a complaint with the Texas Attorney General against Darque Tan because She feels their ads are misleading and irresponsible. However the FTC states in the cease and desist order of California SunCare, Inc in § П (unless, at the time of making such representation, respondents possess and rely upon competent and reliable scientific evidence that substantiates the representation) FTC cease and desist order § П IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents, California SunCare, Inc., a corporation, its successors and assigns, and its officers, and Donald J. Christal, individually and as an officer of said corporation, and respondents' agents, representatives and employees, directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division or other device, in connection with the manufacturing, labeling, advertising, promotion, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any California Tan Heliotherapy product or any other product or service for use in connection with tanning, in or affecting commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from representing, in any manner, directly or by implication, that: A. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation prevents or reduces the risk of cancer, including but not limited to colon or breast cancer; B. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation lowers blood pressure; C. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation has benefits similar to those of exercise, including but not limited to decreased blood pressure or lower heart rate; D. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation reduces serum cholesterol; E. Exposure to indoor UV radiation is an effective treatment for Seasonal Affective Disorder; F. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation is an effective treatment for AIDS; G. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation enhances the immune system; H. For the general population, reduced winter sunlight leads to bone disorders such as osteoporosis and osteomalacia and increased exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation is necessary to reduce the risk of such disorders; or I. Exposure to sunlight or indoor UV radiation has any health benefit, unless, at the time of making such representation, respondents possess and rely upon competent and reliable scientific evidence that substantiates the representation On the other hand the Texas Health and Safety Code states, tanning salons are prohibited from claiming that indoor tanning devices provide any health or medical benefits and there is no provisions to scientific evidence. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has not approved tanning beds as Vitamin D delivery devices or devices that reduce cancer risks. Any advertisements for these unapproved uses are false and violate state law.. The statements made could be categorized as practicing medicine without a license. This case has captured the attention of both sides along with the question of censorship. http://www.naturalnews.com/News_0004...ensorship.html This is a case we should all follow because it will set precedence for us all. Based on the outcome of the ruling.
__________________ It's those small daily happenings that make life so spectacular. |
Bookmarks |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Darque Tan | brownbaby21 | General Tanning Industry Discussions | 18 | 04-08-2007 09:23 PM |
Body Butter Darque | MatrixMan | Tanning Lotion Buzz | 2 | 12-21-2005 09:18 AM |
Body Butter Darque | FIRNGEZ | Tanning Lotion Buzz | 5 | 09-17-2005 05:31 PM |