Tuna off the hook for Prop 65 warning
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
The California Court of Appeals serves food companies a narrow victory in a Prop 65 suit brought by the California attorney general against tuna companies for not warning that tuna includes methylmercury. The court ruled March 11 the companies did not need to include a Prop 65 warning because federal law pre-empted the state regulation in the case, the amount of methylmercury did not meet the threshold to trigger a warning and the chemical occurs naturally in tuna. The decision adds the warning was not necessary because chemical exposure can be averaged over time
You may also be interested in...
Metsera Launches As New Obesity Contender Flush With $290m
Clive Meanwell, former CEO of The Medicines Company, will helm the new company, backed by ARCH and other investors. He talked to Scrip about the new venture.
Deal Watch: AbbVie Teams With MedinCell On Long-Acting Injectables
Collaboration Edition: Including deals involving Evotec/Variant, Sanofi/IGM/Nurix, ABVC/OncoX and Harmony/Bioprojet, along with tech transfer agreements and deals in brief.
GE HealthCare Launches AI-Powered Voluson Ultrasound For Women’s Health
Voluson Signature 20 and 18 ultrasound provides clinicians with workflow efficiencies in detecting female reproductive health problems, especially those related to pregnancy.