Blow Tests FDA’s, Industry’s Patience For Illicit Drug-Related Product Brands
This article was originally published in The Tan Sheet
Executive Summary
Three months after FDA acted on a trade group's complaint and took enforcement action against an energy beverage firm for marketing its product as an alternative to an illicit street drug, the dietary supplement industry has another opportunity to judge how well the agency responds to a firm using drug jargon to market a product
|
Three months after FDA acted on a trade group's complaint and took enforcement action against an energy beverage firm for marketing its product as an alternative to an illicit street drug, the dietary supplement industry has another opportunity to judge how well the agency responds to a firm using drug jargon to market a product. The firm Iloveblow.com, which lists offices in Las Vegas and Los Angeles, is marketing its Blow energy drink mix in vials with 5.75 grams of white powder intended to be mixed into beverages. Blow's branding appears to be an example of what the Natural Products Foundation will warn media about through its Truth in Advertising program as well as an example of something the foundation says FDA should investigate (1 'The Tan Sheet' July 30, 2007, In Brief). "One of our goals is to educate media organizations about what is permissible and what's not so that ads that break the law don't get into print, on air or online in the first place. But when this does happen, we encourage the appropriate agency to take swift action," foundation Executive Director Tracy Taylor told "The Tan Sheet." The Council for Responsible Nutrition filed the complaint that led FDA to take enforcement action in April 2007 against Redux Beverages, which marketed Cocaine energy beverage. FDA told Redux it was marketing the product as an alternative to an illicit street drug and was making unlawful disease claims (2 (Also see "FDA Cocaine Crackdown A “Long Overdue” Positive Development – Industry" - Pink Sheet, 16 Apr, 2007.), p. 13). CRN Vice President for Communications Judy Blatman said FDA should take the same action against Blow, regardless of whether the manufacturer makes unsubstantiated health claims for the product. "We would hope that they would look into it before it builds to a level that just continues to do damage to our industry's reputation," Blatman said. "The controversial name alone warrants FDA's looking into it," she said, adding, "If this ... confuses consumers about what our industry is all about, then that's a concern to us." FDA's action against Redux came more than five months after CRN complained to the agency about the firm's brand and product claims. According to Redux's Web site, it has relaunched the product as No Name, although the firm had said it would use a different name (3 (Also see "Censoring Cocaine Will Cost Redux, But Change Might Open New Markets" - Pink Sheet, 14 May, 2007.), p. 13). Industry experts also recognize FDA's lack of tolerance for firms using drug slang to market a product. On July 21 during a discussion of structure/function claims at NPA's Marketplace conference in Las Vegas, attorney Chris Pelham said FDA in 2000 began objecting to "gimmicky marketing" linked to illicit street or recreational drugs. "FDA is very uncomfortable with products that try to associate themselves with recreational drugs or illicit drugs and sometimes gimmicky marketers can push the envelope sometimes and take a product really into the world of warning letters," said Pelham, an associate with Washington-based Sidley Austin. According to the Blow product label, each package contains 240 mg of caffeine, 2,000 mg of taurine, 140 mg each of inositol and L-carnitine and 50 mg of Kola nut extract. According to Iloveblow's Web site, the product is available in packages of two for $5, 24 for $48 and 96 for $192. In a July 10 release, Iloveblow founder Logan Gola defends the brand against criticism of marketing using drug slang. "Our product is sexy, edgy and fun but also very tongue-in-cheek," he says. The Community Anti-Drugs Coalition of America has alerted its member organizations about the product and about the negative impact of marketing "by glorifying drug use." "You've got these companies that are glorifying drug terminology to sell their products to kids because they know that kids are likely to think it's cool," Mike Gimbel, director of substance abuse education and prevention at Sheppard Pratt Health System in Baltimore, says in a July 26 CADCA release. CADCA says not only does Blow appear identical to cocaine and is packaged in a vial, but it also comes with a mirror and a fake credit card, items commonly identified as cocaine paraphernalia. - Malcolm Spicer ([email protected]) |