老字号健康产品“鱼龙混杂” 谁从“同仁堂”假磷虾油中受益？

Core Viewpoint - The incident involving "Tongrentang" and the alleged fraud related to krill oil is escalating, with the company attempting to distance itself from the implicated entities [1] Group 1: Company Response - Beijing Tongrentang Co., Ltd. clarified that it does not hold any equity or investment rights in Sichuan Health Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., which is mentioned in the reports regarding krill oil [1] - The company emphasized that Beijing Tongrentang Health Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. is the controlling shareholder of Beijing Tongrentang (Sichuan) Health Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., indicating a relationship but not direct ownership [1] Group 2: Legal and Regulatory Concerns - Legal experts suggest that the company's attempt to clarify its position may be seen as a "word game," as the relationship between the companies still exposes the brand to risks [1] - The Shanghai Consumer Protection Committee raised concerns about the suspiciously low procurement price of the krill oil, which sells online for 69.9 yuan per bottle while the supply price is only around 3 yuan, indicating potential fraud [2] Group 3: Market Implications - The Shanghai Consumer Protection Committee highlighted a broader issue of misleading practices in the health and nutrition product market, calling for action to eliminate such "routines" and create a trustworthy purchasing environment [2] - Concerns were raised about the responsibility of Beijing Tongrentang (Sichuan) Health Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. in maintaining the commercial reputation of its parent company [2] Group 4: Product Quality and Responsibility - According to legal experts, if the sales of the krill oil were led by Sichuan Tongrentang, then it and its sales channels should be held accountable for the incident [3] - The social harm of the krill oil incident is significant, as products from subsidiary companies may vary in quality, leading to consumer confusion [3]