Pink Sheet is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

Pearson/health claims forum

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

FDA will hold a public meeting April 4 to solicit input on two dietary supplement labeling issues: implementation of the Pearson v. Shalala decision and whether claims about an effect on an existing disease should constitute a health claim or subject the product to drug regulation. In a March 3 letter to the dietary supplement community, FDA says a Federal Register notice detailing specific issues, logistics and registration information will be published shortly. Implementation of the Pearson vs. Shalala decision and development of a policy on disease-related statements are among CFSAN's "A-list" priorities for 2000 (1"The Tan Sheet" Feb. 14, p. 12)

You may also be interested in...



Health Claims Based On Varying Levels Of Evidence Need Distinctions - FDA

An issue FDA aims to address at the April 4 public meeting on implementation of the Pearson v. Shalala court decision is how best to convey to consumers that certain dietary supplement health claims do not have as much scientific support as other claims.

Health Claims Based On Varying Levels Of Evidence Need Distinctions - FDA

An issue FDA aims to address at the April 4 public meeting on implementation of the Pearson v. Shalala court decision is how best to convey to consumers that certain dietary supplement health claims do not have as much scientific support as other claims.

Health Claims Based On Varying Levels Of Evidence Need Distinctions - FDA

An issue FDA aims to address at the April 4 public meeting on implementation of the Pearson v. Shalala court decision is how best to convey to consumers that certain dietary supplement health claims do not have as much scientific support as other claims.

Topics

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

LL1129949

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel