PARSOL 1789 GRAS/E STATUS NOT IMPEDED BY SHADE OVAGUARD NDA, GIVAUDAN-ROURE
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
PARSOL 1789 GRAS/E STATUS NOT IMPEDED BY SHADE OVAGUARD NDA, GIVAUDAN-ROURE counsel Edward Basile of the Washington, D.C. law firm King & Spalding asserted in an April 26 letter to FDA. Addressing comments made by Shade UVAGuard marketer Schering- Plough to FDA on March 17 ("The Tan Sheet" April 11, p. 10), Basile said Givaudan-Roure was "surprised" that Schering would suggest "that the avobenzone we supply to Schering-Plough under the tradename Parsol 1789 has not been sufficiently reviewed by the agency to establish its status as a generally recognized as safe and effective ingredient."
You may also be interested in...
Supplement GMP Warning Letters Make Modest Debut In 2010
Finalization of a settlement between the Federal Trade Commission and Rexall Sundown regarding unsupported cellulite treatment claims for the firm's Cellasene dietary supplement hinges upon approval of two related class action settlements pending in California and Florida, according to FTC
In Brief
Combe sells most of its OTC brands
People In Brief
Perrigo promotes in pricing, planning