Court Upholds FTC Order Against POM, But Scrutinizes Clinical Trial Requirement
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Jan. 30 issued a ruling largely upholding the FTC’s 2012 order against POM, but said the agency’s argument fails “scrutiny insofar as it categorically requires two RCTs for all disease-related claims.”
You may also be interested in...
Health, Beauty And Wellness News: Launches, Petition, Recalls, Ad Campaign, 'Irreparably Defective' SOP
Earth Mama offers mineral sunscreens; AHPA petitions for pullulan, adds Sustainability Subcommittee; POM Wonderful campaigns with 'Worry Monsters'; Herbalife perks iced protein; 'Disposal/Destruction of Irreparably Defective Articles' SOP draft ready; King Bio-linked homeopathic recalls expand; and Forager recalls protein shakes.
“The industry would face confusion as to the appropriate substantiation standard for non-disease dietary supplement claims,” say the Council for Responsible Nutrition and the Consumer Healthcare Products Association in a joint amicus brief filed with in Second Circuit. They submitted the brief in support of Quincy’s motion urging the appeals court to dismiss an appeal by FTC and New York of a federal district court’s 2017 dismissal of the federal and state agencies' complaint against Quincy.
An amici curiae brief filed in the POM Wonderful case by CHPA and CRN criticizes FTC for relying “on its own ‘expertise’ to determine the meaning of ambiguous advertisements.” A separate brief by attorney Jonathan Emord says FTC is creating unreasonable barriers for food product research.