Pearson v. Shalala "Lowers The Bar" For Health Claims Reliability - FDA
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
The recent decision by a D.C. federal appeals court in Pearson v. Shalala "lowers the bar" on the scientific support needed for dietary supplement health claims and "compels Congress and FDA to adopt a fundamentally different regulatory regime" for such statements, an agency petition for a rehearing of the case asserts. The petition was filed March 1.
You may also be interested in...
Emord Extends Effort To Liberalize QHCs With Selenium, Antioxidant Petitions
Attorney Jonathan Emord continues his effort to force FDA to allow more expansive qualified health claims for nutritional supplements with two petitions relating to the capability of selenium and antioxidant vitamins to reduce the risk of site-specific cancers
Emord Extends Effort To Liberalize QHCs With Selenium, Antioxidant Petitions
Attorney Jonathan Emord continues his effort to force FDA to allow more expansive qualified health claims for nutritional supplements with two petitions relating to the capability of selenium and antioxidant vitamins to reduce the risk of site-specific cancers
Emord Extends Effort To Liberalize QHCs With Selenium, Antioxidant Petitions
Attorney Jonathan Emord continues his effort to force FDA to allow more expansive qualified health claims for nutritional supplements with two petitions relating to the capability of selenium and antioxidant vitamins to reduce the risk of site-specific cancers