磷虾油“零含量”，在透支同仁堂信誉

Core Viewpoint - A product named "Beijing Tongrentang 99% High Purity Antarctic Krill Oil" has come under scrutiny due to a Shanghai Consumer Protection Commission report indicating that the product's phospholipid content was claimed to be 43%, but actual testing revealed it to be 0. The responses from the manufacturer, distributor, and brand owner have created confusion, with each party denying responsibility for the misleading claims [1][3]. Group 1: Company Responsibilities - According to both the Product Quality Law and the Consumer Rights Protection Law, producers and operators are clearly responsible for product quality [3]. - Distributors play a crucial role in maintaining brand reputation and cannot simply dismiss their responsibilities with claims of ignorance [3]. Group 2: Brand Integrity and Market Practices - There are numerous products on e-commerce platforms that prominently feature the "Beijing Tongrentang" name while using smaller fonts for subsidiary names, which raises concerns about brand authorization and quality control [5]. - This practice is seen as "brand exploitation," leveraging the historical value of the brand without establishing a corresponding quality control system throughout the supply chain [5]. - The brand's long-standing commitment to quality, as stated in its founding principles, is at risk of being undermined by such practices, which prioritize market gains over maintaining brand integrity [5].