• Last week the FDA issued warning letters to Honest Globe, Inc. (March 15, 2021) and Biolyte Laboratories, LLC (March 18, 2021) for selling products containing cannabidiol (CBD) in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the “Act”).
  • A principle issue addressed by FDA in the letters is the sale of the CBD containing products as unapproved drugs. The CBD products at issue claimed to provide pain relief as well as a variety of other beneficial effects (e.g., anti-inflammatory, anxiety and depression treatment).  Examples of claims include: “Elixicure pain relief with CBD”, “Deep-penetrating natural pain relief . . . non-addictive pain relief”, “relieving depression, lowering anxiety, lowering blood pressure, lowering intestinal inflammation and more”, “demonstrates antiviral, antibacterial, and antifungal effects for virtually every surface and tissue in the body”, “for temporary relief of occasional . . . minor aches and pains . . . Stiffness of muscles, joints and tissues.”  Therefore, consistent with the definition of drug,  the products are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease and/or are intended to affect the structure or any function of the body. Both letters also state that the products do not meet the requirements under section 505G of the Act which would allow them to be marketed without an approved new drug application. Specifically, among other shortcomings, the active ingredient, CBD, was not an active ingredient in any applicable final monograph or tentative final monograph (TFM). Further, even if CBD was considered an inactive ingredient, the products would still not qualify for the 505G exception because CBD does not conform with the general requirement that it be safe and suitable since it has known pharmacological activity with demonstrated risks.
  • The letters also address a number of other deficiencies and violations, including failure to comply with current good manufacturing practices.
  • As we have previously reported, FDA taken the position that CBD is not a lawful dietary ingredient or dietary supplement, but has focused its enforcement efforts on Warning Letters against companies making unsubstantiated health claims. These letters are consistent with that policy. We will continue to monitor and report on any development in CBD regulation and enforcement.
  • On March 3, 2021, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California invoked the primary jurisdiction doctrine to stay a consumer class action asserting various causes of action against Infinite Product Company, LLC (Infinite) related to the allegedly improper sale of cannabidiol (CBD) products. (See order; law360 subscription required)
  • As we have previously covered in our blog, the federal regulatory framework for CBD remains uncertain. The FDA has taken the position that CBD is not a lawful dietary or food ingredient, even while the market is flooded by CBD products and individual states, such as New York, are forging ahead with their own regulatory frameworks. And while industry had hoped that draft CBD enforcement guidelines—which had been under review by the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) since July 2002—would provide clarity, the draft guidelines were withdrawn in January following the change in administration. No timetable for their release, or for any other FDA regulatory or Congressional action has been announced.
  • The class action had alleged that Infinite improperly and misleadingly marketed CBD products, including labeling of the products as dietary supplements when they were in fact (allegedly) misbranded drugs. The court found that it could not adjudicate the claims “given the lack of clarity as to which of Defendant’s CBD products are drugs, dietary supplements, or food products, and what standards apply to those Products.” Instead, the court held that the primary jurisdiction doctrine, which allows courts to stay cases pending resolution of an issue within the special competence of an administrative agency, was properly invoked because both FDA and Congress have expressed interest in regulating CBD and uniform regulation of CBD is necessary, especially given the potential safety concerns. Therefore, the case was ordered stayed “until the FDA completes its rulemaking and/or Congress passes legislation regarding the definitions, marketing, and labeling of CBD products.”
  • While the order states that the stay will be in effect until Congress or FDA act, it is likely that prolonged inaction might also result in a reversal of the stay. Many courts had initially stayed “natural” class actions pending FDA guidance on the definition of “natural,” but in light of continued FDA inaction, courts have reversed course and refused recent requests to stay. Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor the regulation of CBD products and class-actions relating to their sale.
  • New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced on February 22, 2021 that businesses seeking to operate as cannabinoid hemp processors, retailers, or distributors can now apply for a license through the New York State Department of Health (NYDOH). Any business intending to manufacture, distribute, or sell cannabinoid hemp products in New York State must be licensed.
  • Manufacturers can choose between two types of licenses, which are valid for two years. One license allows processors to extract or isolate cannabinoids, including cannabidiol (CBD), from hemp to create an oil, distillate, isolate, or other product and manufacture the intermediary product into a finished product. The second type of license is for manufacturers that purchase intermediary products and manufacture them into a finished product. Applicants must provide documentation including a description of the products, information about the source hemp, and evidence showing the facility follows current good manufacturing practices. Manufacturers seeking to engage in direct retail sale must separately apply for a retail license.
  • As we have previously reported, the NYDOH published proposed regulations to implement the NY Cannabinoid Hemp Program in October 2020. The rules provide for facility manufacturing guidelines, packaging and labeling standards, and laboratory testing specifications. We will continue to report on developments regarding CBD marketing and manufacturing.
  • On January 8, 2021, FDA commissioner Stephen M. Hahn, M.D. released a statement entitled “Better Data for a Better Understanding of the Use and Safety Profile of Cannabidiol (CBD) Products”, which details the “knowledge gaps” that remain as the FDA works to develop a framework for the regulation of CBD products.
  • As many of our readers know, the 2018 Farm Bill removed “hemp” from the definition of “marijuana” under the Controlled Substance Act, thus removing one legal obstacle from marketing CBD commercially. However, CBD still needs an appropriate regulatory status for its use in conventional foods and dietary supplements. FDA has taken the position that CBD is not a lawful dietary ingredient or food ingredient based on two timing provisions found in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.  While a regulatory pathway for CBD is under consideration and safety data is generated, FDA has focused its efforts on Warning Letters against companies making unsubstantiated health claims.
  • Dr. Hahn’s statement declared that the FDA still has a “limited understanding of the safety profile of CBD” and that important questions remain, including the risks associated with long-term use of CBD products. While acknowledging industry’s efforts to engage with and provide information to FDA, Dr. Hahn cautioned that filling the gaps “will not be a trivial exercise.” The statement describes a framework in which real-world data (RWD) can be used to answer outstanding questions on CBD products including how to understand the safety profile of CBD in the general population and potentially in specific populations. In particular, Dr. Hahn announced the following principles and goals that will guide FDA work in this area:
    • Research projects should contribute to development of more sophisticated data infrastructure for understanding the safety and quality of CBD products;
    • Research projects should yield information to help refine future studies, such as subpopulations that are most important to study;
    • Research projects should be designed to complement the existing work of other stakeholders;
    • More systematic data is needed as existing data largely comes from spontaneously reported adverse events;
    • The development of specific codes in data sets is needed to identify specific CBD products;
    • Longitudinal studies are needed to learn more about the long-term health effects of CBD use.
  • The latest statement from FDA makes clear that a lawful regulatory position for CBD will still take some time to develop and that FDA believes there are substantial safety gaps that need to be addressed. We are also awaiting FDA’s draft enforcement guidance that has been at OMB since July. Keller and Heckman will continue to monitor and report on developments that impact the use of CBD in FDA regulated products.
  • On October 28, 2020, the New York State Department of Health announced the release of the state’s cannabidiol (CBD) proposed regulations to regulate CBD hemp products in New York.  Once finalized and in effect, these new regulations would reverse New York State’s early 2019 ban on the sale of hemp-derived CBD-infused products.
  • By way of background, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)’s current position is that CBD does not qualify for use in food or dietary supplements. FDA is investigating whether it can develop a regulatory framework that would permit the use of CBD under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, but the Agency has identified numerous safety questions that need to be addressed (discussed previously on this blog here) and little progress has been made to resolve them.  New York indicated that these proposed regulations would fill the regulatory void left by FDA’s refusal to set national standards.
  • The proposed rules reflect legislation enacted in December 2019 that called for the establishment of a Cannabinoid Hemp Program, setting out licensing requirements and quality control standards for both CBD hemp processors and retailers, as well as packaging and labeling requirements that all CBD products must meet.
  • The proposed rules
    • Require all hemp CBD products to be manufactured using good manufacturing practices based on the end product’s intended use.
    • State that individual food or beverage products cannot contain more than 25 milligrams of total CBD per product and supplements would be limited to 3,000 milligrams per product. In addition, products cannot exceed 0.3% total Δ9- Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) concentration.
    • Clarify that foods and drinks infused with CBD and other hemp derivatives must be packaged by the manufacturer and cannot be added at the retail level or in restaurants.
    • Prohibit the addition of CBD to alcohol products.
    • State that product labels must contain the total amount of CBD in the product, the number of cannabinoids per serving, a nutritional or supplement fact panel, and information on whether it contains THC.
    • Require products to include warnings that state the product has not been evaluated by FDA, is not intended for children, and that it may cause drug test failures.
    • Require labels to caution pregnant or nursing women to consult a healthcare provider before use.
    • Require hemp producers to conduct lab tests for the CBD profile and for heavy metals, microbial impurities, mycotoxins, pesticides, and residual solvents.
    • Require companies to make the testing information retrievable by consumers through a QR code or corresponding link on the product label.
    • Bar claims that suggest CBD will diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent disease.
  • New York Department of Health will take comments on the proposed regulations through January 11, 2021.  We will continue to monitor any developments.
  • We have discussed the slow progress toward a regulatory pathway for lawfully marketing FDA-regulated food and dietary supplement products that contain cannabidiol (CBD).  While CBD products remain technically illegal (aside from one FDA-approved drug), FDA is gathering information and has taken action so far only against CBD-containing products that make disease and health-related claims or contain unsafe contaminants such as heavy metals and pesticides.  Product labeling that may be false and misleading with regard to CBD content has meanwhile been the subject of a growing number of private lawsuits, such as the proposed class action discussed here.
  • The most recent Cannabis Law Report covers independent testing sponsored by Leafreport finding that of 22 beverages tested, only 4 (13%) contain the amount of CBD stated.  Three products (13%) were reported to contain a level of CBD that is 20% more (2 products) or less (1 product) than stated.  One product (5%) was reported to contain a level of CBD that is 30% more than stated.  Fourteen products (65%) were reported to have a CBD content that differed by more than 30% from the stated level, with 3 beverages containing more CBD than stated, 9 containing less CBD than stated, and 2 products containing no detectable amount of CBD.
  • The results of independent testing indicating inaccurate labeling for CBD beverages is unsurprising given that FDA’s own market survey data, as discussed in a July 2020 report to Congress, has revealed that of 78 products tested which claim to contain CBD, most contained a level of CBD that differed from the labeling by more for 20%.  Eleven such products contained no detectable CBD and 46 contained some level of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a narcotic, including one product with THC levels so high that it was referred to the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) for potential action.  Until there is an FDA regulatory framework for foods or dietary supplements containing CBD, however, buyers need to be cautious.

 

  • We reported on a November 14, 2019 citizen petition submitted to FDA by the Consumer Healthcare Products Associated (CHPA) requesting that the agency issue regulations to establish a clear pathway for the use of cannabidiol (CBD) in dietary supplements.  After public hearings and the first of two Congressionally mandated reports from FDA, discussed here, however, the market for FDA-regulated food and dietary supplement products that contain CBD continues to grow rapidly while a regulatory pathway for lawfully marketing such products still is not in place in the U.S.
  • Undeterred by FDA’s inaction on the CHPA petition, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) filed a similar citizen petition on June 16, 2020 urging FDA to regulate hemp-derived CBD as a dietary ingredient.  The petition distinguishes “full spectrum” hemp extracts from CBD isolates, which CRN argues is the substance that has been approved for use in a drug and is therefore prohibited from use in a food or a dietary supplement.  Regarding the petition’s focus only on dietary supplements, a CRN spokesperson told Food Navigator that FDA’s report to Congress indicates that FDA’s safety concerns may be limited to food uses of CBD, although CBD-infused beverage brands maintain that both categories can be safely accommodated under the current regulatory framework.  CRN recognizes that its petition could languish with FDA and told Food Navigator that the organization is focusing mainly on legislative initiatives to bypass FDA altogether.
  • A June 17, 2020 letter from the consumer organizations, Consumer Federation of America (CFA), Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), Consumer Reports, and Public Health institute, urged lawmakers not to push FDA to act on CBD before it has adequate data or to by-pass FDA.
  • A group of seven CBD brands (Boulder Botanicals & Bioscience Labs, CBDistillery, CBD American Shaman, Charlotte’s Web Holdings, Columbia Care, HempFusion, and Kannaway) have committed to collectively sponsor ValidCare (a clinical trial outsourcing and market research company) in conducting observational research to evaluate the impact of daily CBD use (both full-spectrum, hemp-derived CBD and CBD isolate) on the liver function of healthy adults.
  • According to a press release issued by ValidCare on June 9, 2019, the liver study, the results of which will be provided to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for consideration in its efforts to regulate CBD, is scheduled to begin in July 2020 and expected to be completed by the end of this year.  The study intends to aggregate data from at least 700 consumers, which will be combined with information regarding personal history, blood tests, and product information.
  • Participants will be provided with oral CBD products from the study’s supporting brands for consumption in connection with the study.  Participants will be required to attest that they have used the products for at least 60 days prior to the start of the study, and continue consuming the products for the duration of the study.  Participants will document their CBD use and any observable effects for 30 days, and provide blood samples.  The study is observational (not a randomized double-blind placebo controlled human clinical study), and FDA’s treatment, consideration, and evaluation of these results has yet to be seen.  As previously reported here on this blog, FDA recently announced that it made “substantial progress” towards a goal of providing additional guidance on ingestible CBD products, but offered no specific details and continued to emphasize its ongoing questions and concerns about the science, safety, effectiveness, and quality of CBD products (which include concerns regarding liver toxicity).
  • We will continue to monitor the situation for any developments.

 

  • After public hearings and the first of two Congressionally mandated reports from FDA, discussed here, the market for FDA-regulated food and dietary supplement products that contain cannabidiol (CBD) continues to grow rapidly while a regulatory pathway for lawfully marketing such products still is not in place in the U.S.  Although FDA has not clearly formulated an interim enforcement discretion policy, its CBD enforcement actions thus far have targeted only CBD-containing products that make disease and health-related claims or contain unsafe contaminants.
  • An FDA spokesperson told Food Navigator-USA last week that the Agency has made “substantial progress” toward a goal of providing additional guidance on ingestible CBD products but offered no specific details and continued to emphasize that FDA has questions about the science, safety, effectiveness, and quality of CBD products.  The FDA spokesperson declined to comment on FDA’s “Cannabis and Cannabis-Derived Compounds: Quality Considerations for Clinical Research; Draft Guidance for Industry’” which was recently posted as pending review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and was taken as an encouraging sign for industry.
  • It is not clear whether this new guidance document on human clinical studies of CBD represents progress toward a regulatory pathway for food and dietary supplements, since the title suggests that it addresses scientific issues rather than regulatory ones.  Nevertheless, human clinical studies would help address FDA’s safety concerns with the use of CBD in such products (although animal studies would certainly be important too).
  • The FDA issued warning letters to BIOTA Biosciences, LLC and Homero Corp DBA Natures CBD Oil Distribution for selling unapproved products containing cannabidiol (CBD) in violation of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act).
  • The letter issued to BIOTA cited the company for marketing injectable products containing CBD that were advertised to, among other things, “eliminate the global opioid epidemic by providing a safe and natural alternative,” “suppress pain and aid in the detoxification process,” and provide “[i]nstant relief for patients that are symptomatic of inflammatory auto-immune diseases.” The FDA asserted that the CBD products: (1) were unapproved drugs because they were intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, and/or intended to affect the structure or function of the body, and had not been approved or been generally recognized as safe, and (2) were misbranded drugs because they were not labelled with adequate directions for use by laypersons; nor could they be, since the products were not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by laypersons.
  • The letter issued to Homero cited the company for marketing various CBD products to both humans and animals— including topicals, oils, and edibles— that similarly claimed to treat disease, and also claimed to aid recovery from opioid addiction. In addition to asserting that the CBD products marketed for humans were unapproved and misbranded drugs, the FDA asserted that (1) CBD products could not be marketed as dietary supplements; (2) the introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of the products was a prohibited act under Section 301(ll) of the FD&C Act; and (3) the CBD edibles were adulterated foods because CBD is an unapproved food additive. The FDA also asserted that the CDB products marketed for animals constituted unapproved new animal drugs.
  • The letters demonstrate the FDA’s continued concerns regarding the safety of CBD products (see FDA’s March update on potential harms of CBD products) and the public misperception that the safety of CBD products on the market have been evaluated by the FDA.