Search Results

Words like “may help with” is not a get-out-of-claims-jail-free card < Back Supplement & CBD company cited for disease claims Words like “may help with” is not a get-out-of-claims-jail-free card Supplement & CBD company cited for disease claims. #WarningLetterWednesday The FDA inspected the company facility in October 2021, then six months later reviewed the website for disease claims, finding many that resulted in a warning letter. This is a trend. In the past year, there have been several warning letters like this, where an FDA inspection led to a website review several months later, and many disease claims were uncovered. This is a friendly reminder to re-review the website for disease words after an FDA inspection, as they will look at this months later. Even well-intentioned companies may unknowingly have high-risk words lurking on old blogs and social media posts. Here is a post about this . From warning letter: “On your webpage for “Elderberry Plus Vitamin C”…“Aids with cold, flu and virus symptoms” Takeaway: This is an example of an unknowing copywriter using common language about elderberries, then copying this onto a product page. This is another reason to build a culture of compliance from within to help social and copywriter employees, the ‘front line of defense’ employees, understand how not to inadvertently turn a disease claim into a drug. I have lots of free content to support this, such as this post and video . This letter also includes CBD. There have been 26 CBD-related warning letters this year, up from just seven in 2021. This is a clear sign that the FDA will continue to focus on CBD companies making disease claims while essentially leaving CBD companies that follow GMP manufacturing practices and do not make risky claims alone. From warning letter: “CBD Gummies may help relieve pain, inflammation, anxiety, and depression.” Takeaway: Using words like “may” and “studies suggest” is not a get-out-of-claims-jail-free card. Read the full warning letter here . Disclaimer: The educational information provided here is for informational purposes only. Contact an attorney for specific legal advice. Rule #1 in compliance is to ensure marketing is truthful and not misleading. Previous Next Get Warning Letter Wednesday in your Inbox Sign-Up Now!

Unsafe products marketed to children are deceptive < Back FDA/FTC Delta 8 Warning Letters Unsafe products marketed to children are deceptive Products like Doweedos Delta-8 Edible Chips were cited in yesterday's joint FDA/FTC warning letters. There were actually six warning letters sent in this enforcement action group, but for some reason, only five were joint FDA/FTC letters, and one was just an FDA letter. The FTC has more "teeth" than FDA, and these joint letters should send warning shots to sellers of THC and delta 8 products that are packaged favorably to children. Unfortunately, since this is not the first of these actions , I am unsure if the delta 8 market has gotten (or cares) about the message. One of the most interesting parts of this action is the use of Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts. This prohibition includes practices that present unwarranted health or safety risks. Delta 8 poses dangers, especially to children, in favorable formats like cookies and bright-colored candy that looks like store-bought food. This is considered deceptive marketing. From warning letter. "Preventing practices that present unwarranted health and safety risks, particularly to children, is one of the Commission's highest priorities." Distributors are responsible: The companies in this enforcement action appear to be distributors of other products, showing that marketplace websites can be on the hook for what they sell. In the past FDA has primarily focused on large distributors like Amazon or websites selling dangerous products like delta 8. FDA does not like delta 8 for good reason, as shown in this consumer update . Delta 8 can be dangerous, and according to data from National poison control centers, 2,362 delta 8 exposure cases had been reported, including "One pediatric case was coded with a medical outcome of death." This report warns consumers that delta 8 products are widely available in forms favorable to children, such as chocolates and candies. This should have given the delta 8 industry pause, but these products have unfortunately continued to increase. The warning letters go into great detail about how the products mimic candy and other typical children's junk food. Here are some of the more appalling (and humorous) examples. Trips Ahoy Chocolate Chip Cookies: Flaming Hot Weedos Double Stuff Stoneo cookies This FTC quote sums it up nicely. "Companies that market and sell edible THC products that are easily mistaken for snacks and candy are not only acting illegally, but they are also putting the health of young children at risk," said Samuel Levine, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Those that prioritize profits in front of children's safety are at serious risk of legal action." FDA reviewed many of these websites starting earlier this year and, according to the warning letters, re-reviewed the websites over the past few months. I ask, "What can we do to support the agency in removing these products from the market quickly, rather than having to go through the several months-long process they did here?" I think we can all agree taking these products out of the potential hands of kids is a good thing. In some instances, the online sellers removed only the products mentioned in the warning letters but continued to sell dangerous products. I ask, "Will they continue to sell these products, or will they face additional enforcement action?" After writing Warning Letter Wednesday for three years, I am still amazed by some of the bold claims and adulterated products sold, but this company won my "most OTT" prize. In addition to the delta 8 products cited in this warning letter , they are also selling pounds of psilocybin mushrooms from their website. The last I checked, these were Schedule 1 drugs, which means the potential for big legal issues. Oy vey! Here's the FTC press release on this action. DATE ORIGINALLY POSTED: 7/17/24 Disclaimer: The educational information provided here is for informational purposes only. Contact an attorney for specific legal advice. Rule #1 in compliance is to ensure marketing is truthful and not misleading. Previous Next Get Warning Letter Wednesday in your Inbox Sign-Up Now!

When will FDA go after “Nature’s Ozempic” claims < Back Biomarker Claims Enforcement When will FDA go after “Nature’s Ozempic” claims Making biomarker claims about dietary supplements has some risks, and here I explore enforcement trends to be aware of. In recent years, the FDA has increased scrutiny of biomarker-related claims, especially those linked to serious health conditions like heart disease and diabetes. A significant shift occurred in 2022 when the FDA began issuing warning letters for claims that were previously considered risky but not ultra-high risk. These include statements such as "lowers LDLs," "lowers cholesterol," and even "lowers bad fats" without the use of higher-risk terminology like "hypertension." Other biomarker claims that have been cited include "lowering A1C levels and blood sugar," which implies an effect on diabetes management, and "reducing arterial plaque," which suggests an influence on preventing cardiovascular disease. Interestingly, while FDA has cited heart health-related biomarker claims, there have not been notable warning letters related to C-reactive protein (CRP) or other inflammatory biomarkers. FDA seems to generally take a "hands-off" approach regarding discussions of inflammatory biomarkers, as long as no explicit disease claims are made. This suggests that while some biomarker claims may fall into the grey area, companies should use caution and keep up to date on enforcement trends to avoid crossing into disease claim territory. One hot area to watch is GLP-1 claims, which, when combined with claims such as "Nature's Ozempic," may be enough for a warning letter. DATE ORIGINALLY POSTED: 9/25/24 Disclaimer: The educational information provided here is for informational purposes only. Contact an attorney for specific legal advice. Rule #1 in compliance is to ensure marketing is truthful and not misleading. Previous Next Get Warning Letter Wednesday in your Inbox Sign-Up Now!

< Back Panel Discussion Thursday Mar 24, 2022 2022 Regulatory and Compliance Update NoCo Hemp Expo, Denver, CO Speakers: Josh Hendrix , Jonathan Miller , Asa Waldstein , Samantha Walsh , Marielle Weintraub Today, there are a number of congressional bills and legislative and regulatory activity that can have an impact the hemp industry. Join this expert panel for an overview and analysis of key political, policy and regulatory activity that require the hemp industry’s attention, and how producers and marketers of CBD and other cannabinoids, in particular, can remain compliant in the face of USDA, FDA, EPA and other regulatory oversight. Learn More Previous Next

< Back Panel Discussion, Presentation Friday May 14, 2021 What Can Marketers Learn From FDA/FTC Action Lucky Leaf Expo, Austin, TX In this session, we review recent enforcement trends and discuss ways companies operating in the hemp-CBD marketplace can limit their risk, while still be truthful and not misleading. This includes identifying high-risk verbiage and providing examples of lower-risk ways to get the same message across. This discussion reviews the dos and don'ts of digital marketing such as best practices for blog posts. Learn more Previous Next

< Back Symposium Friday Oct 16, 2020 4 Hour cGMP & Marketing Workshop with Steven Yeager & Asa Waldstein American Herbalist Guild (AHG) Annual Symposium Herbal supplement manufacturers and marketers need to have a solid understanding of current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP). In this interactive presentation, you'll learn about the intricacies of cGMP, including all CFR 111 subparts. We'll give you examples about how to comply with each section, practical steps for implementing them in your facility, and common mistakes to avoid. We also provide real-world examples of how to prepare for and conduct oneself should you have to undergo an FDA inspection. We review common marketing mistakes made by herbal manufacturers and marketers. Only $30 and supports this important organization Purchase Previous Next

Ensure ingredients are GRAS for the marketed population < Back Printed Brochures Are Labeling Ensure ingredients are GRAS for the marketed population FDA has been paying close attention to probiotic products marketed to preterm infants recently, and this letter shows the continuing trend. There are ~100 searchable Warning Letter Wednesday posts here! You can search old posts for keywords. I've developed this as a resource for your regulatory, marketing, and executive teams. You can also sign up there to have Warning Letter Wednesday delivered to your inbox. 🔷An interesting part of this warning letter is that printed brochures are cited. Of course, all marketing is an extension of the label, but in this digital era, this is rare. FDA references claims made in a printed brochure that was given to hospital staff. Other than tradeshows and items gathered during GMP inspections, I can’t remember seeing printed brochures cited in the recent past. The lesson here is that even printed literature can elevate the risk of a warning letter. 👉From warning letter. Your “Probiotics and Preterm Infants: Clinical Evidence” handout provided by your sales representative to hospital staff has a section with the heading “Probiotics in the NICU: Clinical Evidence” that states, “Probiotics have shown to significantly improve outcomes” for “All-cause mortality,” “Necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC),” “Late-onset sepsis,” and “Feeding tolerance,” and that represents “Benefits of probiotics on NEC,” as “significantly reduc[ing] incidence of NEC in clinical studies.” The other marketing handout with the heading “The Promise of Similac Another Innovation Only From Similac” states that Similac® Probiotic Supplement undergoes safety testing to “ensure the probiotic is ready for hospital use” 🔷FDA took issue with a few of the probiotic ingredients in the product. For example, this probiotic is considered a new dietary ingredient (NDI), and the FDA states there is insufficient safety data to back up its use in preterm infants. According to a well-known supplier’s website, this ingredient is GRAS, but I wonder if the safety data applies to preterm infants. If the product was not marketed to preterm infants, it probably wouldn’t have been mentioned in this letter, in my humble opinion. 👉 From warning letter. “S. thermophilus (TH-4®), a new dietary ingredient for which there is inadequate information to provide reasonable assurance that such ingredient does not present a significant or unreasonable risk of illness or injury, when used in preterm infants.” 🔷There is a lot more to this warning letter, such as FDA’s comments regarding the safety of B. infantis in preterm infants. Please share your thoughts on this. Here’s the FDA press announcement . Read the full letter . Disclaimer: The educational information provided here is for informational purposes only. Contact an attorney for specific legal advice. Rule #1 in compliance is to ensure marketing is truthful and not misleading. Previous Next Get Warning Letter Wednesday in your Inbox Sign-Up Now!

Be nice to FDA investigators & follow inspection SOPs < Back Refusing FDA Inspection Access Be nice to FDA investigators & follow inspection SOPs GMP inspection preparedness is an essential part of business and compliance. This includes ensuring team members know how to conduct themselves during an inspection, what types of information FDA is allowed to request, and understanding what can go wrong if staff do not allow access to the specific areas of the facility. This warning letter is an extreme example of what not to do during an inspection. The company, a cosmetic and topical OTC manufacturer, was issued a letter for not allowing FDA to enter certain areas of their facility, but it doesn't stop there. Apparently, the quality manager shoved and shouted at FDA investigators? As my daughter would say, "WTF." From warning letter. "Quality Manager entered the laboratory and exhibited hostility by shoving and shouting at our investigators for conducting the inspection without their presence. Additionally, laboratory staff refused to open a drug stability chamber based on his hostile behavior. FDA inspectors are real people, and common courtesy goes a long way, such as offering them water (do not offer anything else as it is considered inappropriate), suggesting a good restaurant for lunch, and just being nice. It goes without saying that shouting and shoving anyone, especially FDA, is bad, and it would set up the rest of the inspection to go much worse than it could have. Employee training and mock FDA inspections are a critical part of a smooth "real" GMP inspection. It is standard practice for FDA to request a list of complaints to ensure they are being investigated properly. A customer complaint related to mold and its associated investigations was not disclosed in the list of complaints provided to the FDA. The section of the warning letter is sad and potentially speaks to an unfriendly and potentially fishy work environment. From warning letter. "While interviewing an employee regarding the undisclosed positive mold results for your …. your Quality Manager entered the room and began berating the employee, who then left the room, impeding FDA's review of your contamination investigation required under CGMP." There are several other GMP citations listed in the warning letter. Failure to Test Finished Products (21 CFR 211.165(a)). Failure to Test Components for Identity and Purity (21 CFR 211.84(d)). Testing glycerin for diethylene glycol (DEG) or ethylene glycol (EG) is mentioned here. FDA is very serious about this and has been mentioned in 40+ warning letters this year. Inadequate Facility and Storage Conditions (21 CFR 211.42(b)). Inadequate Quality Unit Oversight (21 CFR 211.22). Lack of Process Validation and Cleaning Validation (21 CFR 211.100(a) and 211.67(b)). This warning letter reads like a bad movie and makes the company look unprepared and non-compliant. Read the full letter here . DATE ORIGINALLY POSTED: 12/25/24 Disclaimer: The educational information provided here is for informational purposes only. Contact an attorney for specific legal advice. Rule #1 in compliance is to ensure marketing is truthful and not misleading. Previous Next Get Warning Letter Wednesday in your Inbox Sign-Up Now!

< Back Interview Friday Feb 26, 2021 The Surprising Risks of Marketing CBD Products Hemp Startup Journey In this engaging conversation with FDA compliance expert Asa Waldstein, we discuss how to avoid an FDA warning letter which surprisingly goes way beyond what businesses state on a product label. We cover best practices for CBD company social media managers, effective marketing messages with lower risk language, dos and don'ts of reposting and hashtags, mitigating compliance risk, avoiding making CBD health claims, and how to market your products instead. You will find out what it means for Asa to Create Authentic Excitement in your differentiation strategy and the peace of mind you may get from it. We also discuss cGMP compliance and Asa's recommendations for Spectrum Labs' GMP accreditation journey. Watch or Listen Previous Next

< Back Presentation Tuesday May 23, 2023 Regulatory compliance and reducing class action risk Naturally Informed - Microbiome: Mastering the Market 2023 A blurry concept only 5 years ago, the microbiome has become understood as perhaps the most critical environment impacting human health – and consumers know this. What they know less about is exactly how it works and what they can do to impact it. And the more things come into focus, the more we have yet to learn about these complex systems so fundamental to life – the science is evolving literally daily. This three-day intensive virtual conference will examine not only probiotics, prebiotics, synbiotics and postbiotics, but also numerous other microbiome- modulated interactions including the impact of stress and diet. Experts will examine leading-edge science, and deliver practical tools to leverage this science to competitive advantage and truly mastering the market. Register Previous Next

< Back Podcast Wednesday Dec 4, 2024 Unveiling Supplement Regulations: Asa’s Insights on Compliance and Ethical Marketing Natural Products Marketer Podcast Unlock the secrets of dietary supplement regulations with our esteemed guest, Asa, a seasoned regulatory consultant with a background in clinical herbalism. Discover the intricacies of FDA oversight in the supplement industry and learn why the notion that dietary supplements are unregulated is a myth. Asa’s journey from herbal studies in Boulder to advising companies on maintaining compliance provides unique perspectives and invaluable lessons for anyone navigating this complex field. Gain a deeper understanding of the transformative impact of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) and its role in shaping the herbal and dietary supplement industry. We explore the distinction between structure/function claims and disease claims, and how these affect marketing strategies. Delve into the evolution of labeling and marketing regulations, and consider potential legislative updates that could further refine the guidelines set by DSHEA over the past three decades. Lastly, we tackle the challenges retailers face in complying with regulatory guidelines, particularly in the context of influencer marketing and digital platforms. Learn about the risks associated with unsubstantiated claims and how innovative tools like Apex Compliance software are helping companies stay in line with regulations. Through practical advice and expert insights, this episode equips businesses with the knowledge to market their health products ethically and legally. Listen to the Podcast Previous Next

Re-review online marketing after FDA inspection < Back Improper 483 responses Re-review online marketing after FDA inspection This company was inspected by FDA and received several common 483 violations, such as improper specifications and not having written procedures for cleaning and product returns. 🔷 From my reading of this warning letter, they could have probably avoided the GMP-related letter if they had responded correctly. People like Marian Boardley and Tara Couch can help with 483 responses. Here is FDA’s response to a poor 483 response. 👉 From warning letter. “we are unable to evaluate your corrective action because you have not provided revised “Raw Materials Spec Sheet” for the components used in the manufacture of the …. dietary supplements, nor have you provided finished product specifications for each of the products.” 🔷As with all warning letters, looking at the timing is important. The company was inspected in March and April this year and provided 483 responses in May. One month later, in June of this year, FDA reviewed the company’s website and found some violations, such as “anti-cancer” statements. They also cited the product name “Edema NatRelief” as a disease claim. Usually, product names must really push compliance boundaries to be cited, such as this warning letter from September, where the product “Full Body Antibiotic” was called out. As I’ve spoken about in previous posts, FDA has been reviewing websites 2-8 months after inspection, which is a friendly reminder to double-check online marketing if you’ve recently been visited by FDA. This is one of the reasons I developed Apex Compliance, which helps companies find the high-risk “forgotten landmines” before they become issues. In fact, I ran Apex Compliance on their website and found even riskier claims that were not mentioned here. Removing them now can help this company avoid repeat warning letters or lawsuits. Learn more about Apex Compliance . 🔷Some of the violations are scary. For example, identity testing for the Rauwolfia root ingredient was done by organoleptics rather than analytical testing. This ingredient is amazing at helping to lower blood pressure, but if the company received a Rauwolfia extract rather than the root powder, for example, this could have potentially led to a hypotensive (low blood pressure) crisis. Read the full warning letter . Disclaimer: The educational information provided here is for informational purposes only. Contact an attorney for specific legal advice. Rule #1 in compliance is to ensure marketing is truthful and not misleading. Previous Next Get Warning Letter Wednesday in your Inbox Sign-Up Now!