Search Results

Asa Waldstein and two top advertising attorneys share their tips and best practices for marketing stress supplements. 🔷Stress-free rules Ivan Wasserman, Amin Talati Wasserman, LLP 🔷Pooja's do's and don'ts Pooja Nair 🔷Asa's helpful hints Supplement Advisory Group < Back Stress: What can you claim on a product label? Danielle Masterson Interview Asa Waldstein and two top advertising attorneys share their tips and best practices for marketing stress supplements. 🔷Stress-free rules Ivan Wasserman, Amin Talati Wasserman, LLP 🔷Pooja's do's and don'ts Pooja Nair 🔷Asa's helpful hints Supplement Advisory Group Read More Previous Next

Asa and other industry leaders interviewed < Back Stay in your lane: Novel delivery systems must comply with supplement regulations Judy Blatman Interview Asa and other industry leaders interviewed Read More Previous Next

< Back Interview Thursday Apr 29, 2021 Compliance, Herbalism, and the FDA view on CBD LuvNCann I enjoy speaking about my opinion of the FDA's view on CBD, warning letters, herbalism, and so much more on this great podcast! This is a unique podcast started to support hosts Osiris and Nina in their quest for health and happiness while raising a son with epilepsy. They have curated some important discussions! Learn more Previous Next

No such thing as “too small to be on FDA’s radar” < Back Discussing Ingredient Benefits Leads to a Warning Letter No such thing as “too small to be on FDA’s radar” Small herb company cited for elderberry-oriented disease claims. This is a good reminder there is no such thing as “too small to be on the FDA’s radar.” Claims in the letter provide some good learning opportunities. Discussing ingredient benefits on a commercial website where those ingredients are sold is a marketing claim, even if there is no cross-linking to a product page. In this letter, the company made statements about elderberry in their “Elderberry 101” FAQs. Here is another post about this. From warning letter: “In 2004, a study on elderberry extract in flu patients revealed that symptoms were relieved 4 days sooner than patients who didn’t receive elderberry.” Claims made on social media are also cited. It seems like the majority of warning letters involve social media claims. The front and last line of defense is the company’s social media manager. Unfortunately, it’s common for these team members not to understand the nuances of supplement marketing. This is one of the reasons I make helpful hints regulatory videos such as this. From warning letter: “Benefits of Elderberry .. From Facebook “Another 2020 review of five elderberry studies concluded that, when taken within 48 hours of initial symptoms, elderberry supplements may reduce the length and severity of fever, headache, runny nose, and congestion associated with cold and flu.” Copying literature or “research” about an ingredient onto a commercial website or social media post is a common trap new supplement marketers fall into. I talk about this here . This is another example of a well-intentioned cottage herb company that didn’t understand the rules of marketing supplements, thus resulting in a warning letter. Once product marketing is posted online or on socials the risks of FDA/FTC scrutiny increase. Unfortunately, marketing compliance is not commonly taught at herb or natural medicine schools. Helping to educate this community is one of my missions, so please help me spread the good word of compliance. 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!

Reporting of a SupplySide West presentation < Back Sales soar for probiotic-containing soft drinks Jeff Gelski Interview Reporting of a SupplySide West presentation Read More Previous Next

Ensure vendors are properly qualified < Back 7 Homeopathic Eye Product Warning Letters Ensure vendors are properly qualified Eight companies received warning letters for selling homeopathic and other eye-lubricating products. This signals the continued shift in FDA’s enforcement priorities towards homeopathics. Most of these companies were selling ophthalmic homeopathic products with some disease claims. I assume that if there were no GMP concerns, the products were not for use in the eyes, the target audience was adults, and there were no serious disease claims, many of these companies would not have received warning letters. FDA probably cited this group of products because they are (ophthalmic) added to the eyes, which may potentially endanger eye health. There are allowable OTC monographs for these types of products, but it seems the products were homeopathics, not labeled as OTCs (Drug Facts Panel), or in at least one instance, the product was labeled as an OTC but was not submitted to the required National Drug Code Registry . Products added to the eyes can be dangerous, and eye two lubricant products contain NAC, which I don’t think is approved for ophthalmic delivery. When I was a supplement manufacturer, I always said NO to making these types of products. From warning letter, “Ophthalmic drug products, which are intended for administration into the eyes, in general pose a greater risk of harm to users because the route of administration for these products bypasses some of the body’s natural defenses.” Here are some other highlights: 🔷 This company was cited for making disease claims in testimonials. It is worth noting that testimonials were showcased and promoted in a banner. If the testimonials were part of a 3rd party review widget, such as those uncurated reviews that come in through a service like Trustpilot, they probably would not have been cited. 🔷 My “day job” is running a regulatory consulting company. Contact me to discuss reviews, labels, or online marketing compliance questions. This helps support my WLW writing passion (smiles). 🔷 Normally, there has to be commerce for a company to receive a warning letter. This company does not appear to conduct commerce on its website and only offers a practitioner login option. The company was selling ophthalmic products with disease claims, which led to the warning letter even though there does not seem to be public commerce on the site. This is VERY INTERESTING and should be a wake-up to companies using this strategy to push the compliance boundaries. 🔷 This well-known homeopathic company was cited for not only making ophthalmic homeopathic products and disease claims, but this warning letter also includes numerous GMP violations. Products from this company were placed on import alert, which speaks to the severity of the alleged GMP issues. I assume that FDA “followed the breadcrumbs” for other products made at this facility, which led to the Walgreens and CVS warning letters. This highlights the need for supplier qualification, something consultant Nate Call is an expert at. 🔷 A four-year-old social post was cited, which is another reminder to remove language from all social media, no matter how old. 🔷 From warning letter. “February 9, 2019 Twitter post: An image of the “Vision Clarity Eye Drops” with the text, “Carnosine, a cataracts worst nightmare.” 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!

Learn from other’s mistakes < Back Arthritis Claims Enforcement Learn from other’s mistakes Since the beginning of 2023, 11 warning letters have been issued for arthritis-related supplements and topical product claims. Here, I explore these warning letters, look at common trends, and share key takeaways. Higher-risk disease claims : I have always wondered if making arthritis claims alone is enough to trigger a warning letter. The answer is surprisingly “not really.” All warning letters since the beginning of 2023 have included high-risk words like cancer, depression, and fibromyalgia, except one. This warning letter accompanied GMP citations and included arthritis claims that were part of an out-of-compliance OTC drug that did not follow the official monograph. Social media and YouTube : 45% (5 out of 11) mention claims on social media and YouTube. This is not a surprising number, and it shows FDA’s continued focus on social media marketing claims. Some of the cited social posts were a couple of years old, which is a reminder to ensure even those old posts are “clean” of disease claims. Are you interested in finding the high-risk statements on your website, videos, and content before publishing? My software product, Apex Compliance, can help you identify and replace these high-risk phrases before they lead to warning letters and lawsuits. Our AI has been custom-trained on compliance principles, including warning letters, and it helps you understand what compliant language looks like. Learn more and set up a free demo here . Blogs : 18% include claims made in blogs. I’ve written a lot of this before, such as in this post . GMP Inspections Lead to Marketing Review : 27% of letters started with a GMP inspection, which led to a marketing review. I write more about this here . Drug-spiked ingredients were mentioned in 18% of these letters . The moral of the story is to keep disease words like arthritis out of marketing, and they will signal to authorities to look deeper for other high-risk marketing phrases. 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!

Discussing ingredient benefits is marketing < Back Website “About Us” Claims Cited in Warning Letter Discussing ingredient benefits is marketing This warning letter cites claims made in the “About Us” section of the company’s website. Usually, when “About Us” claims are mentioned in warning letters, there is some hyperlinking to a shopping cart, but this letter mentions CBD and high-risk disease words such as Dravet Syndrome without any clear linking. The lesson here is simply talking about an ingredient can lead to a warning letter if that ingredient is sold on the website. From warning letter. “On your “About Us” webpage…CBD is FDA approved to treat seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, Dravet syndrome, and Tuberous Sclerosis Complex.” This is the 34th CBD-related warning letter this year, up from just seven in 2021. This year certainly has been the year of the CBD warning letter, and I expect many more in 2023, including a crackdown on delta-8 and other isomer products. This company cited in this letter also sells fruits, such as mango and pineapple, that were apparently sprayed with CBD. FDA has been cracking down on CBD in food due to being favorable to children and the possibility of creating a safety concern. Read more about this here . This CBD fruit citation is another example that the days of “putting CBD in everything" are gone. Hashtags also play a prominent role in this warning letter. One post lists # anxiety and # depression. Over 30% of this year’s CBD warning letters mention the one-two punch of anxiety and depression. This post includes these two words together in hashtags is an excellent example of what not to do. From warning letter. “…promising results regarding #cannibidiols [sic] potential to assist with cognitive illnesses, including #anxiety and #depression.” 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!

< Back Virtual Fireside Chat Friday Jun 16, 2023 Substantiation Dossiers: Building Trust in Label Claims for Retailers, Influencers, and Consumers Radicle Science June 16, 2023 (10:00 am PT / 1:00 pm ET) The dietary supplement industry has no shortage of attention lately when it comes to the Federal Trade Commission and the recent notices of penalty offenses on label claims. Brands are reaching for substantiation dossiers as a means to provide their retailer partners, influencers, and customers assurance that their label claims are factually accurate. Join Radicle Perspectives with Asa Waldstein , Principal of Supplement Advisory Group , as we discuss how to mitigate label claim risk, the impact recent headlines have had on dietary supplement consumers, and what Asa sees is next when it comes to the FTC drama. Key Topics: Understanding label claim risks in the dietary supplement industry Strategies to mitigate label claim risk through substantiation dossiers Insights into the future of FTC regulations and its implications for the industry Watch On Demand Previous Next

< Back Presentation, Online Friday Nov 18, 2022 Naturally Informed: Living Longer, Stronger & Healthier Virtual Conference Registration Naturally Informed powdered by Wholefoods Magazine and Trust Transparency Center Asa Waldstein presents a regulatory and enforcement update on notable action happening in emerging categories such as brain health; bone, muscle, and joint health; libido; immunity; heart health; eye health; and more! On Demand Access Previous Next

Product reviews must be honest and truthful < Back Online company fined $4.2M for blocking negative product reviews Product reviews must be honest and truthful #WarningLetterWednesday Online company fined $4.2 million for blocking negative product reviews. The FTC alleges the company blocked product reviews with less than four stars. This is considered deceptive marketing and clearly warns companies that product reviews should be accurate. Here is what we can learn. 🔷Best practices for soliciting and posting reviews. From FTC letter ➡️Examples may include asking for reviews only from those likely to leave positive ones, preventing or discouraging submission of negative reviews, subjecting negative reviews to greater scrutiny, refusing to publish negative reviews, or otherwise not treating positive and negative reviews equally. 🔷Here are some FTC rules for possible exceptions to the "post all" rule. From FTC press release➡️(the company) must post on its website all customer reviews of products currently being sold—with the exception of reviews that contain obscene, sexually explicit, racist, or unlawful content and reviews that are unrelated to the product or customer services like shipping or returns. Here is a video about product reviews . Read the FTC press release . This is a different Warning Letter Wednesday because it is an FTC action (not FDA), and it involves a fine (not a warning letter) and doesn't include a supplement company. This is a good reminder that we can learn from other agency actions such as this one. 👉Join my Warning Letter Wednesday group 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!

Everything used to market products must be compliant < Back Product Tags & Metatags Attract FDA Attention Everything used to market products must be compliant Website product tags and metatags continue to attract FDA attention in warning letters. #WarningLetterWednesday This year three warning letters mention product tags or “category” tags. These tags help people find products when they search for things on Google or a website, and they are considered marketing in the eyes of the FDA and FTC. Although these tags are an “extension of the label,” they are not likely to attract a warning letter on their own. However, they signal intended use, which can lead authorities to a commercial website to keep digging for claims once there. Here are some examples involving product tags and metatags with disease claims. It's worth noting that additional high-risk website and social media claims are also present in each warning letter. This is an important reminder that compliance is not done in a vacuum, and all online content must be free of high-risk claims to avoid warning letters. From Warning Letter: “From the product webpage at …. Tags: anxiety, . . . memory, mental performance, natural depression remedy” Read this warning letter From Warning Letter: “Tags: anti-viral, COVID, COVID-19, Cure ” Read this warning letter From Warning Letter: “The above noted website claims are supplemented by metatags used to bring consumers to your website ….. through Internet searches. The metatags are: • “Take Altitude RX for altitude sickness prevention…” Read this warning letter here: Here is my “All Marketing is Labeling ” video. 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!