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


California bill

This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet

Executive Summary

Measure that would prohibit sale of supplements containing ephedrine alkaloids, creatine, andro, DHEA or pregnenolone to children under 18, require specific label warnings set for Senate approps committee hearing May 13. SB 1750, introduced by Sen. Jackie Speier (D), passed HHS committee April 25 by 7-1 vote, despite opposition from industry groups including CHPA, NNFA, EEC, who claim bill would impose unnecessary, burdensome requirements on marketers. Separate Speier bill (SB 1562) passed education committee April 30 by 11-0 count, also will be heard by approps committee May 13. Measure, which faces no industry resistance, would require school districts to educate grades 7-12 on effects of performance enhancing substances, weight-loss products (1"The Tan Sheet" March 11, 2002, p. 10)...

You may also be interested in...

Sport Supplement High School Education Program Urged In California Bill

All secondary schools in California would be required to instruct students on the effects of performance-enhancing substances under a state bill recently introduced by Sen. Jackie Speier (D)

AstraZeneca's Risky Lynparza Endpoint In Pancreatic Cancer Goes Before Advisory Cmte.

US FDA usually recommends using overall survival for pancreatic cancer drugs, but AstraZeneca choose progression-free survival; now ODAC will weigh in on whether the PARP inhibitor olaparib demonstrated a clinically meaningful impact. The firm cites enrollment and design challenges in the gBRCAm population as reasons for using PFS.

Did Sarepta Need To Tell Investors About Its Vyondys 53 Dispute Resolution Request?

Attorneys say Sarepta did not have an obligation to report its appeal, particularly since winning a formal dispute filing with the US FDA is a long shot.





Ask The Analyst

Please Note: You can also Click below Link for Ask the Analyst
Ask The Analyst

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