PCPSA's 'No Harm' Standard Would Set High Bar For FDA Ingredient Review
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
Regulatory consultants have concerns about the draft Personal Care Products Safety Act's proposed standard for FDA ingredient review – reasonable certainty of no harm. The standard's de facto application in FDA's review of new dietary ingredients in the supplement space has resulted in a fail rate of around 75%.
You may also be interested in...
California’s Toxic Free Cosmetics Act And The Case For Iconclad Federal Preemption
Limited to no federal preemption is included in cosmetics bills under consideration in the 116th Congress, which means that even if one were to pass in its current form, companies could still be at the mercy of states, typically California, imposing unique bans or restrictions on cosmetic ingredients.
In Time For Halloween, FDA Rule Conjures Up Specter Of Renewed Cosmetic Lead Debate
FDA’s final rule is specific to lead acetate’s use in hair-coloring products, but the agency’s recognition of current consensus – “that there is no safe exposure level for lead” – could spook the wider cosmetics industry, particularly given that some of the same NGO petitioners that drove the rulemaking are clamoring for an all-out ban on trace lead in lipsticks and externally applied cosmetics.
FDA Ban On Flavoring Ingredients Should Prompt Removal From Fragrances – WVE
The battle between hazard and risk ideologies goes on as NGO Women’s Voices for the Earth calls for the removal of five fragrance ingredients from personal-care products that FDA recently – if reluctantly – struck from its list of approved food additives. The agency maintains the substances pose no risk to public health.