The industry-known watchdog associations shoot more and more on the market of for food supplements and balanced diets. In this case, a manufacturer of a dietary supplement with extracts of echinacea and elderflower was called off. Advertised was the product among other things with the statement: “The X containing a wealth of carefully selected natural substances such as echinacea and elderflower, which are known to be able to support the natural defences.” The watchdog Association relied on the interests of its own members, mind you own food supplement manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies, and warned off 1924/2006 (health claims regulation, HCVO) the statement for violation of 11 LFGB and regulation. By the OLG Hamm, the matter had to be decided now final analysis. How often in these cases, the Court gave the watchdog Club right. According to the judges is the statement that echinacea and elderberry flowers give the property the product, for a significant To make sure neither scientifically sufficiently secured in the sense of the LFGB still not generally scientifically recognised within the meaning of the HCVO support natural defences. This could then be left, whether it would be sufficient meaning in both, if the scientific substantiation would result from a single work, based on convincing methods and findings. Already, the existence of a study proving a sufficiently safe, that the two mentioned substances have the advertised physiological effect, was not explained.

A summary of a meta-analysis presented in the English language, also leave as a so-called abstract not recognize whether the analysis is based on convincing methods. The analysis of the studies was neither in the English language completely have been submitted in German translation. It had been required to assess the suitability of the study. There was evidence, not even the daily dose of echinacea and the form of the statement. The widely known and enshrined in the popular belief opinion, Echinacea and elderberry could the immune system does not support for themselves, rich as scientific evidence.