Experts Debate Precedent Value of Latest Ephedra Decision
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
Food and drug law experts tell "The Tan Sheet" they take a more reserved view than Nutraceutical Corp. attorney Jonathan Emord of a federal court decision that Emord says ensures FDA's final rule banning ephedra is not a "precedent for the creation of a supplement-wide risk-benefit adulteration standard.
You may also be interested in...
Will Nutraceutical Succeed In Asking Supreme Court To Review Ephedra Ban?
According to food and drug lawyer Marc Ullman, it is unlikely the Supreme Court will review the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals decision affirming FDA's ban of ephedra in dietary supplements
Nutraceutical Renews Ephedra Case In Utah Court; FDA To Respond By Jan. 18
FDA did not provide advance notice and opportunity for public comment when it "created a new adulteration standard" in its 2004 final rule banning ephedra alkaloids in dietary supplements, Nutraceutical argues in a motion renewing its case against FDA
Ephedra: Experts Speak Out On The Good, The Bad And The Ugly
Left to its own devices FDA might not conduct a new risk/benefit analysis; however, a citizen petition asking for an analysis of an herb could spur FDA to action, Attorney Marc Ullman told "The Tan Sheet."