HBW Insight is part of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC’s registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction
UsernamePublicRestriction

Hatch's Cosmetics Bill Trades Recall Authority For New 'Adulterated' Language

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

Attorney Angela Diesch says the draft FDA Cosmetic Safety and Modernization Act would lower the burden of proof FDA faces in federal courts when taking action against products it deems dangerous. She views the provision as another compromise between antecedent bills proposed in the House and Senate.

You may also be interested in...



Claire's Scare Revives Concerns About Asbestos-Tainted Kids' Cosmetics

Another retailer of cosmetics aimed at girls, Claire's, faces allegations of asbestos-contaminated makeup products, less than six months after tweens-focused Justice came under similar fire. Both retailers say their own independent testing showed products in question to be asbestos-free, but the PR damage may be done.

Former FDA Cosmetics Director Weighs In On Senator Hatch's Draft FCSMA

Under the draft FDA Cosmetic Safety and Modernization Act, a product could be deemed adulterated "regardless of whether it is known which particular substance or substances may render the cosmetic injurious." EAS Consulting Group's John Bailey offers his perspective on the provision and the overall bill in an exchange with the Rose Sheet.

Former FDA Cosmetics Director Weighs In On Senator Hatch's Draft FCSMA

Under the draft FDA Cosmetic Safety and Modernization Act, a product could be deemed adulterated "regardless of whether it is known which particular substance or substances may render the cosmetic injurious." EAS Consulting Group's John Bailey offers his perspective on the provision and the overall bill in an exchange with the Rose Sheet.

Related Content

Topics

UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

LL1133546

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel