From: CcohenP@aol.com
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 7:07 AM
To: fdadockets@oc.fda.gov
Subject: Public Comment on Qualified Health Claims (68 Fed. Reg. 66040)

Questions of public health are of far more concern than whether a 
manufacturer's new car is more "sexy" than that of a competitor.  While "puffery" is an 
accepted part of advertising, it has no place when the health of an individual 
or society is concerned.

It makes no sense to allow producers of food products to make extravagant 
claims that attribute magical health-giving properties to their products by 
simply including a statement (using a font as small as the regulations allow) that 
these statements have no scientific support or credibility.  Allowing the 
market's "invisible hand" to play a dominant role in selling foods does not 
require that the "hand" should be permitted or even encouraged to write falsehoods 
and then, parenthetically, warn the reader in minuscule print that everything 
said is likely to be an untruth.

The public's health is too important to allow untruthful advertising.  Such a 
regressive step is unworthy of the proud heritage of society's public health 
practices.  Moreover, if we are truly concerned with cost-effectiveness, this 
is certainly not the direction in which we should proceed.

Peter J. Cohen, MD, JD
    Adjunct Professor of Law
    Georgetown University Law Center
    Washington, DC

Please send correspondence to:
    10703 Clermont Avenue
    Box 569
    Garrett Park, MD 20896-0569
    Phone: (301) 942-6077
    FAX: (301) 942-6708
    E-mail: ccohenp@aol.com