VMG Global Guilty of Selling Steroid-Spiked Supps
The company actually got off pretty easily: a $500,000 fine vs. $5.6 million in revenue.
Elissa is a former research associate with the University of California at Davis, and the author/co-author of over a dozen articles published in scientific journals. Currently a freelance writer and researcher, Elissa brings her multidisciplinary education and training to her writing on nutrition and supplements.
5 Comments
Submit a Comment
Find Us on Amazon!
January 26, 2010
VMG Global Guilty of Selling Steroid-Spiked Supps – http://blog.ultimatefatburner.com/2010/0…
January 27, 2010
It’s a little difficult to understand how a product labelled ‘Tren’ would not be understood to contain trenbolone or some close analogue thereof; so what was deceptive about it?
January 28, 2010
Your observations are well-taken, but the “fact” apparently remains that, at least as reported, the indictment was premised on the allegation that the product was falsely represented as containing a “steroid”. If the reporting is accurate, the only way in which this allegation could have been accurate at the time is if the product had been advertised as containing a(n) (illegal) “steroid”, as opposed to a then-legal “pro-hormone” analog of trenobol. Given the latitude that the law allows for commercial puffery (as evidenced by your other examples), that would have been such a difficult, if not impossible, claim to prove that it’s not surprising that the govt cut a deal – and, imo, given the law re commercial speech, the govt got a much better one than they could reasonably have expected in what looks like a grossly overreaching effort to harass a supplier of what was at the time a perfectly legal concoction (rather than a case of a company getting off lightly).
January 27, 2010
Actually, it’s not that unusual for some bodybuilding supp manufacturers to give fakey-steroid names to their products. Hi Tech Pharmaceuticals, for example, sells “Anavar” and “Dianabol” – neither of which contains oxandrolone or methandrostenolone (at least to my knowledge).
It’s part of appearing hardcore and cutting edge. To take a related example, I can buy bodybuilding supps named “Poison,” “Nuclear Garbage” and “Virus” without any fear that they actually contain anything toxic or biohazardous. 😉
So something labelled “Tren” wouldn’t necessarily mean anything to purchasers.
I imagine, however, that the “deceptive” part might refer to representations on the part of the company that the supps in question were legal and/or safe. If I get a free moment, I may see if I can track down the case on Pacer, to see how this particular allegation was worded. It’s tough to rely on media reports, as they don’t always get the fine details correct.
January 28, 2010
That’s not the impression I got from the article. What is says is this:
“…according to the documents, VMG Global, which also does business as American Cellular Labs, knowingly deceived consumers and the government by marketing two illegal drug products that each contained a synthetic anabolic steroid under the guise of dietary supplements.”
The way I’m reading this, is that the products were not falsely represented as containing steroids, rather, they contained steroids, that were (according to the gov’t) falsely represented as dietary supplements. The gov’t evidently regards them as “unapproved drugs” and thus, not supplements as defined by DSHEA.
I expect the government cut a deal as it was the most expedient means to achieve the desired objective: to get the products off the market. The various designer steroid products never were “perfectly legal” – VMG’s own attorney, Rick Collins, said as much in a presentation at ISSN last year:
“If companies continue to make and sell products – like methylated prohormones – that don’t meet the definition of a supplement or a new dietary ingredient, the Government may well take aggressive action to remove them either by enforcement or legislation.”
Personally, I don’t have an issue with various PH/DS type products. But – as the law currently stands (and is being interpreted), seems to me that the company did get off lightly.