Editing Pomegranate (section)

=== Health claims ===
Despite limited research data, manufacturers and marketers of pomegranate juice have liberally used results from preliminary research to promote products.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/superfoods/Pages/is-pomegranate-a-superfood.aspx |title=Pomegranate: superfood or fad? |publisher=UK National Health Service (NHS) |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160328033945/http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/superfoods/Pages/is-pomegranate-a-superfood.aspx |archive-date=28 March 2016 |date=26 April 2018 }}</ref> In February 2010, the FDA issued a [[FDA Warning Letter|warning letter]] to one such manufacturer, [[POM Wonderful]], for using published literature to make illegal claims of unproven anti-disease effects.<ref name="urlPom Wonderful">{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/ucm202785.htm |title=Pom Wonderful Warning Letter |publisher=U.S. Food and Drug Administration |access-date=24 March 2011 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110424142723/https://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/ucm202785.htm |archive-date=24 April 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.fda.gov/Food/LabelingNutrition/ucm202784.htm |title=Understanding Front-of-Package Violations: Why Warning Letters Are Sent to Industry |website=[[Food and Drug Administration]] |access-date=24 March 2011 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110319133653/https://www.fda.gov/Food/LabelingNutrition/ucm202784.htm |archive-date=19 March 2011 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web | author = Starling S | title = FDA says Pom Wonderful antioxidant claims not so wonderful | publisher = NutraIngredients.com | url = http://www.nutraingredients-usa.com/Regulation/FDA-says-Pom-Wonderful-antioxidant-claims-not-so-wonderful/?c=7InNqGv0Ajf%2BGsoljaV0RA%3D%3D | date = 3 March 2010 | access-date = 6 March 2010}}</ref>

In May 2016, the US [[Federal Trade Commission]] declared that POM Wonderful could not make health claims in its advertising, followed by a [[US Supreme Court]] ruling that declined a request by POM Wonderful to review the court ruling, upholding the FTC decision.<ref name="ftc">{{cite web|title=Statement of FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez Regarding Supreme Court's Decision Not to Review POM Wonderful Case|url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/05/statement-ftc-chairwoman-edith-ramirez-regarding-supreme-courts|publisher=Bureau of Consumer Protection, US Federal Trade Commission|access-date=18 July 2017|date=2 May 2016|quote=I am pleased that the POM Wonderful case has been brought to a successful conclusion. The outcome of this case makes clear that companies like POM making serious health claims about food and nutritional supplement products must have rigorous scientific evidence to back them up. Consumers deserve no less.|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170518144104/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/05/statement-ftc-chairwoman-edith-ramirez-regarding-supreme-courts|archive-date=18 May 2017}}</ref><ref name="forbes">{{cite magazine|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/chloesorvino/2016/05/02/the-verdict-pom-wonderful-misled-its-customers-a-blow-to-its-billionaire-owners/#53b8da454b94|title=The Verdict: POM Wonderful Misled Its Customers, A Blow To Its Billionaire Owners|author=Sorvino, Chloe|magazine=Forbes|date=2 May 2016|access-date=18 July 2017|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170518112114/https://www.forbes.com/sites/chloesorvino/2016/05/02/the-verdict-pom-wonderful-misled-its-customers-a-blow-to-its-billionaire-owners/#53b8da454b94|archive-date=18 May 2017}}</ref>