Hatch, Cannon Oppose Risk-Benefit For Ephedra; Experts Discuss NPA Brief
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
"Nutritional supplements are not drugs and should not be regulated as such," Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, said in response to inquiries about the possible review of the risk-benefit standard by the Supreme Court
You may also be interested in...
NPA To Supreme Court: Risk-Benefit Standard Would “Unravel” DSHEA
The National Products Association filed a brief with the Supreme Court April 6 in support of Nutraceutical Corp.'s petition for review of an appellate court decision upholding FDA's use of a risk-benefit standard to determine product adulteration
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
FDA Gets Green Light For Risk-Benefit Analysis From Ephedra Ruling
An appellate court decision upholding FDA's ban of ephedra "will embolden FDA to challenge products that have a bad safety profile," according to Scott Bass, a food and drug law expert and partner at Sidley Austin (Washington, DC)