The claimed analysis is justified by my findings. I must take exception, however, to the following statement: “Prepared with great care from a good grade of Spring Wheat, by our special process, which preserves the natural food properties of the product.” The company evidently tries to carry water on both shoulders, on the one hand claiming a reduction in the starch content, while on the other claiming the preservation of all “the natural food properties.” 20 PER CENT. GLUTEN MEAL Referee Company Water 7.65 5-10 Ash 1.22 1-2 Protein (N × 5.7) 24.68 20-30 Fiber 0.12 1-2 Carbohydrates 65.41 65-70 Fat 0.92 1-2 Starch 51.24 65-70 The company’s analysis is confirmed. As the company claims directly that this is “Not A Diabetic Food,” any criticism of its use for that purpose is disarmed. However, again exception must be taken to the statement that “the natural food properties of the product” are preserved. PURE GLUTEN MEAL Referee Company Water 4.60 5-10 Ash 0.96 1-2 Protein (N × 5.7) 76.78 75-80 Fiber 0.08 1-3 Carbohydrates 16.77 0-5 Fat 0.81 0.25-0.70 Starch 6.77 0-5 The minimum claim as to protein is justified. Again the company confuses carbohydrates and starch, and the food instead of containing from 0 to 5 per cent. of “carbohydrates (starch)” actually contains 16.77 per cent. of carbohydrates, of which 6.77 per cent. is starch. Once more the statement that “the natural food properties” are preserved is untrue as applied to a wheat product deprived of most of its starch. In justice to the company, it should be noted that on the labels of “Pure Gluten Biscuit” and “Pure Gluten Meal” appears the warning: “Every person suffering from diabetes should be under the care of an experienced physician,” and on the label of “40 per cent. Gluten Meal,” “Persons suffering from diabetes should use this food only on the advice of a physician.” On the other hand, the suggestion on the label of “Pure Gluten Meal,” “Write for a copy of Diabetic Foods and How to Use Them” is a more or less direct invitation to self-treatment. Moreover, a letter dated May 9, 1916, apparently dictated for the Kellogg Food Company by one Ruth French, in reply to an inquiry from a layman, gives direct advice with no reference whatever to a physician. CLAIMS MADE IN A LETTER TO A LAYMAN In addition to this inconsistent attitude the letter makes certain clear misstatements, as follows: