Nicotine Replacement Therapy Prop 65 Warning Unfounded, FDA Tells Court
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
A California appellate court's ruling that a Prop 65 warning for nicotine replacement therapies is not federally preempted would require product manufacturers to use warning language FDA has determined lacks scientific support, the agency says
You may also be interested in...
NRT Firms’ Deference To “Informal” FDA Letters In Prop 65 Case Improper
NRT firms' reliance on "unpublished, ad hoc" FDA statements to support their contention that a Proposition 65 warning on OTC smoking cessation products conflicts with federal law is improper, according to a brief filed in California Supreme Court April 15
FDA Prop 65 NRT Warning Rejection Should Be Given Deference, Firms Say
FDA's view that a Prop 65 pregnancy warning on OTC nicotine replacement therapies is "without scientific foundation" should be given more weight, NRT firms assert in a brief filed in California Supreme Court Jan. 21
NRT & Prop 65
California Supreme Court on Oct. 23 grants nicotine replacement therapy makers' petition to review appellate ruling finding Prop 65 warning is not federally preempted. FDA filed letter brief in support of manufacturers, saying Prop 65 warning language has been deemed unacceptable by the agency (1"The Tan Sheet" Sept. 23, 2002, p. 15)...