Body Science Supplements owner ordered to forfeit $180,000 in drug case

A supplement shop and more than $2.2 million in sales

The case concerned selective androgen receptor modulators, known as SARMs, and selective estrogen receptor modulators, or SERMs, rather than peptides.[1] Prosecutors described sales through a supplement store and the internet, followed by transfers of the proceeds between business and personal accounts.[1]

Garman opened Body Science Supplements in Lebanon, Pennsylvania, around March 30, 2019.[1] The store sold vitamins and supplements, but Garman and an associate also used the business and the Savior Research brands to sell unapproved and misbranded drugs.[1]

Garman admitted that he conspired to distribute and did distribute SARMs and SERMs across state lines from 2019 to 2021, knowing the activity was unlawful under federal drug law.[1] Products sold online reached customers through the U.S. Mail and private carriers.[1]

Total product sales through the business and its associated brands exceeded $2.2 million.[1][6] Prosecutors said the large majority consisted of unapproved and misbranded drugs; that figure describes the operation's sales, not Garman's personal profit.[1]

The label contradicted the sales conduct

The bottles carried conflicting messages: they were labeled as dietary supplements, for research purposes only and not for human consumption, as Pennsylvania news outlet PennLive reported in June.[6] Garman and an associate also gave customers advice about taking the products, a direct conflict with the labels' stated purpose.[1][6]

Federal drug regulations assess intended use through more than the words printed on a package.[4] The rule at 21 CFR 201.128 identifies labeling claims, advertising, oral or written statements, and the circumstances of distribution as evidence of the responsible person's objective intent.[4]

In this case, the government's account describes a seller who knew the products were intended to affect the body and helped customers use them.[1] The sales conduct matters because it helps establish what the products were being sold for, even when the label says otherwise.[1][4]

FDA had warned about this market well before the sentencing announcement.[3] Its April 2023 consumer update says SARMs are unapproved drugs and cannot legally be marketed in the United States as dietary supplements or drugs.[3] The agency also warns of associations with serious health problems, including liver injury and increased risk of heart attack or stroke.[3]

Those are broader safety warnings, not a finding that Garman's products caused a particular customer's injury.[1][3] The September 30 announcement centers on unlawful distribution, misleading labeling and the movement of proceeds.[1]

Where the money went

The financial case followed what happened after customers paid.[1] Garman used multiple bank accounts, including a business account held with another person.[1] He and a coconspirator then transferred proceeds to other accounts, including personal accounts, and used the money to pay credit card charges, prosecutors said.[1]

Garman made more than $180,000 in net profit from the unlawful activity.[1] U.S. District Judge Keli M. Neary ordered him to forfeit $180,000 as proceeds of the offenses, alongside the year of probation.[1] The release describes one conspiracy count connected to distributing misbranded drugs and another for money laundering.[1]

The business's multimillion dollar sales total describes the scale of the operation, while the forfeiture order specifies the proceeds Garman must surrender.[1] The announced outcome reaches both the distribution of the products and what happened to the money they brought in.[1]

Frequently asked questions

Sources and further reading

1. U.S. Attorney’s Office: Garman sentencing and forfeiture announcement
3. FDA: April 2023 consumer warning about SARMs
4. 21 CFR 201.128: Meaning of intended uses
6. Jonathan Bergmueller, PennLive: June reporting on sales and conflicting product labels

Related reading

• What research use only means and how intended use is assessed