Search Warning Letters

Friday, April 29, 2011

Standard Homeopathic Company, Inc. 4/29/11

  

Department of Health and Human Services' logoDepartment of Health and Human Services

Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration
 

Los Angeles District
Pacific Region
19701 Fairchild
Irvine, CA 92612-2506
Telephone: 949-608-2900
FAX:  949-608-4415

WARNING LETTER


CERTIFIED MAIL        
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

 

W/L 38-11

April 29, 2011

Mark S. Phillips, President
Standard Homeopathic Company
210 W 131st St
Los Angeles, CA  90061-1618

Dear Dr. Phillips:

During our September 8, 2010 to October 28, 2010 inspection of your pharmaceutical manufacturing facility, Standard Homeopathic Company, located at 210 W 131st Street, Los Angeles, California, investigators from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA or Agency) identified significant violations of Current Good Manufacturing Practice (CGMP) regulations for Finished Pharmaceuticals, Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.), Parts 210 and 211. These violations cause your drug products to be adulterated within the meaning of section 501(a)(2)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) (21 U.S.C. § 351(a)(2)(B)) in that the methods used in, or the facilities or controls used for, their manufacture, processing, packing, or holding do not conform to, or are not operated or administered in conformity with, CGMP. 

In addition, FDA reviewed your firm’s labeling submitted to the export certificate program for homeopathic drug products and labeling and marketing information found on your website at the internet address http://www.hylands.com. This review revealed that your firm is marketing drugs that are misbranded in violation of sections 502 and 503 of the Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 352 and 353).

We have reviewed your firm’s response of November 10, 2010, and note that it lacks sufficient corrective actions.  

CGMP Deviations

Specific violations observed during the inspection include, but are not limited, to the following:

1. Your firm does not have adequate written procedures for production and process controls designed to assure that the drug products you manufacture have the identity, strength, quality, and/or purity they purport or are represented to possess [21 C.F.R. § 211.100(a)]. 

For example, your firm’s mixing times in the approved records for Belladonna, Chamomilla, Calcarea Phos., and Coffea Cruda 1X dilutions, and the approved record for Hyland's Teething Tablets, are not supported by adequate process validation. 

We acknowledge your action to recall the Hyland’s Teething Tablets and your commitment to ensure that all (b)(4) tablet batch records will accurately reflect the times established in your mixing studies conducted with the 150 gallon (b)(4) and the 15 gallon (b)(4) mixers.  However, we cannot consider your response adequate until you scientifically justify the use of surrogates, such as (b)(4) , in your validation study instead of the actual ingredients used in your products.  There is no assurance that the surrogates have similar mixing characteristics, particle size distribution, or other potentially important characteristics to accurately simulate the (b)(4) mixing process.   

2. Your firm failed to establish time limits for the completion of each phase of production to assure the quality of the drug product [21 C.F.R. § 211.111].  

For example, your firm has failed to establish hold times for the 1X dilutions of Chamomilla and Belladonna. Hyland’s Teething Tablets (lot (b)(4)) were manufactured on May 26, 2010, using a Chamomilla 1X dilution (lot (b)(4)) and a Belladonna 1X dilution (lot (b)(4)) that were manufactured on January 27, 2010, and February 18, 2010, respectively. Your firm’s hold times of (b)(4) for the Belladonna 1X dilution and (b)(4)  for the Chamomilla 1X dilution are not supported by any scientific evidence showing the lack of blend segregation.

3. Your firm failed to conduct testing on in-process materials for identity, strength, quality, and purity during the production process, at commencement or completion of significant phases, or after storage for long periods [21 C.F.R. § 211.110(c)].  

For example, your firm failed to conduct in-process testing to ensure blend uniformity for Belladonna 1X dilution (lots (b)(4)). Your firm only conducted an examination for color, odor, and taste. 

4. Your firm failed to test each lot of a component with a potential for microbiological contamination that is objectionable in view of its intended use [21 C.F.R. § 211.84(d)(6)]. 

For example, your firm fails to analyze and test your botanically derived components for the presence of likely objectionable organisms prior to the manufacture of drug products, including those intended for infants and toddlers. Although your firm commits to test components used in the Hyland’s Homeopathic Teething Tablets for total plate counts, Escherichia coli, Salmonella species, yeast, mold, and Clostridium botulinum, you have not committed to assess botanically derived components for other possible objectionable organisms such as Bacillus cereus.  Furthermore, you response failed to address the other botanical components used to manufacture other marketed products, such as Hyland Colic Tablets, which are also intended for use in infants and toddler populations.

5. Your firm has not thoroughly investigated the failure of a batch or any of its components to meet its specifications whether or not the batch has already been distributed [21 C.F.R. § 211.192]. 

For example, your firm’s Quality Control Unit (QCU) failed to identify the root cause and assess the impact on other related lots when approximately 62 kilograms of Restful Legs Tablets (lot (b)(4) ) were rejected due to the presence of brown specs on April 8, 2010. 

In your response, your firm states that you will train your QCU on Root Cause Analysis and Corrective Action Prevention.  However, your response is inadequate because your firm has failed to extend the investigation to other lots and products that may be associated with this failure. 

This is a repeat violation from the January 2010 inspection.

Misbranding [§§ 503(b)(4) and 301(a)]

FDA reviewed your labeling submission to the Export Certificate Program dated August 5, 2010 and your website at the internet address http://www.hylands.com in January 2011.  FDA reviewed your firm’s labeling and website information for homeopathic drug products, including but not limited to: “Leg Cramps with Quinine Tablets,”  “Nighttime Cold ‘n Cough 4 Kids,” and “Bedwetting Tablets.”

Your product labeling and website document the intended uses of your products including, but not limited to the following:

Leg Cramps with Quinine Tablets:  “Viscum Album 3X HPUS – for symptoms of . . . sciatica”  “Rhus Toxicodendron 6X HPUS – for . . . Sciatica with pains in tendons and ligaments.”

Nighttime Cold ‘n Cough 4 Kids:  “Pulsatilla 6X HPUS - spasmodic cough . . . ” “Sulphur 12X HPUS 
. . .  burning runny nose”

Bedwetting Tablets:  “Rhus Aromatica 3X HPUS - for incontinence with constant dribbling in children.”  “Belladonna 3X HPUS (0.0003% Alkaloids) – for frequent and profuse urination with sensation of motion in bladder.  For incontinence and continuous dropping.”

Based on the above labeling and claims, these products are drugs under section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B)), because they are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in man, and under section 201(g)(1)(C) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(C)), because they are intended to affect the structure or function of the body.

Section 503(b)(1) of the Act (21 U.S.C. 353(b)(1)) identifies criteria for determining the prescription status of a product.  The products listed above are prescription drugs within the meaning of Section 503(b)(1) of the Act because they are intended to treat diseases that require diagnosis and treatment by a physician or are intended to provide treatment for symptoms usually caused by an underlying disease process that requires diagnosis and treatment by a physician.  Because they may be dispensed only by prescription of a licensed practitioner, these products are misbranded under Section 503(b)(4) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 353(b)(4)) in that their labels fail to bear the symbol, "Rx only." 1 Your marketing of these misbranded products violates Section 301(a) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 331(a)).

We recognize that these products are labeled as homeopathic drugs with active ingredients measured in homeopathic strengths.2 The definition of "drug" in section 201(g)(1) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)) includes articles recognized in the official Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States (HPUS), or any supplement to it.  Homeopathic drugs are subject to the same regulatory requirements as other drugs; nothing in the Act exempts homeopathic drugs from any of the requirements related to adulteration, labeling, misbranding, or approval.  We acknowledge that many homeopathic drugs are manufactured and distributed without FDA approval under enforcement policies set out in the Agency’s Compliance Policy Guide entitled, “Conditions Under Which Homeopathic Drugs May be Marketed (CPG 7132.15)” (the CPG).  As its title suggests, the CPG identifies specific conditions under which homeopathic drugs may ordinarily be marketed; thus, in order to fall under the enforcement policies set forth in the CPG, a homeopathic product must meet the conditions set forth in the CPG.  One of those conditions is compliance with Section 503(b) of the Act.  Under the CPG, only homeopathic products intended solely for self-limiting disease conditions amenable to self-diagnosis (of symptoms) and treatment may be marketed OTC.  Homeopathic products offered for conditions not amenable to OTC use must be marketed as prescription products. 

Misbranding [§§ 502(a) and 301(a)]

Your firm’s products “Leg Cramps with Quinine” and “Leg Cramps PM with Quinine” are misbranded under Section 502(a) of the Act because the labeling is false and misleading.  The labeling of “Leg Cramps with Quinine” and “Leg Cramps PM with Quinine” prominently displays the ingredient “Quinine” on the front of the package and in the name of the product.  The labeling is false and misleading because it suggests that quinine is the active ingredient when in fact the active ingredient is “Cinchona Officinalis.”

Further, the label indentifies this active ingredient as “Cinchona Officinalis 3X HPUS (Quinine).”  According to the HPUS, although Cinchona bark contains quinine, it also contains other related alkaloids.  Your selective identification of only one of the alkaloids in Cinchona bark is false and misleading because it incorrectly suggests that there is only one alkaloid in Cinchona bark. 

Your marketing of these misbranded products violates Section 301(a) of the Act (21 U.S.C. § 331(a)).

The violations cited in this letter are not intended to be an all-inclusive statement of violations that exist at your facility.  You are responsible for investigating and determining the causes of the violations identified above and for preventing their recurrence and the occurrence of other violations.  It is your responsibility to assure compliance with all requirements of federal law and FDA regulations.

You should take prompt action to correct the violations cited in this letter.  Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in legal action without further notice including, without limitation, seizure and injunction.  Other federal agencies may take this Warning Letter into account when considering the award of contracts.  Additionally, FDA may withhold approval of requests for export certificates, or approval of pending drug applications listing your facility, until the above violations are corrected.  FDA may re-inspect to verify corrective actions have been completed.Within fifteen working days of receipt of this letter, please notify this office in writing of the specific steps that you have

taken to correct violations.  Include an explanation of each step being taken to prevent the recurrence of violations and copies of supporting documentation.  If you cannot complete corrective action within fifteen working days, state the reason for the delay and the date by which you will have completed the correction.  Additionally, your response should state if you no longer manufacture or distribute any of the products that are the subject of this letter, including Hyland Teething Tablets, and provide the date(s) and reason(s) you ceased production and if or when you plan to resume production. 

Your reply should be sent to:  Blake Bevill, Compliance Branch Director, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 19701 Fairchild, Irvine, CA  92612-2445.  If you have question a regarding any issue in this letter, please contact Marco Esteves, Compliance Officer at (949) 608-4439.

Sincerely,

/s/

 

Alonza E. Cruse
District Director

           

_____________________________________
1 We note that the Agency’s Compliance Policy Guide entitled, “Conditions Under Which Homeopathic Drugs May be Marketed (CPG 7132.15)” (the CPG) states that, in accordance with § 503(b)(1) of the Act, homeopathic drug products offered for conditions that require diagnosis or treatment by a licensed practitioner must bear the prescription legend, “Caution: Federal law prohibits dispensing without prescription.” The CPG was issued by the agency in 1988. In 1997, Congress enacted the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act (FDAMA) (Public Law 105-115); Section 126 of FDAMA amended section 503(b)(4) of the Act to require that the label of a prescription drug product must bear, at a minimum, the symbol "Rx only."
2 For example, the label for “Bedwetting Tablets” includes the ingredients “Equisetum Heymale 3X HPUS, Rhus Aromatic 3X HPUS, Belladonna 3X HPUS.”
 
 
 
 

 

-

Thursday, April 28, 2011

Viruxo.com 4/28/11

Federal Trade Commission LOGO                     HHS logo

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HUMAN SERVICES
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20740

 

 
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
 
WARNING LETTER
 
 
Mr. Jim Hill
Viruxo LLC
6470 NW 135 Ave
Morriston, Florida 32668
 
Dear Mr. Hill:                                                                                     
 
This is to advise you that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reviewed your website at the Internet address www.viruxo.com in April 2011.  FDA has determined that the product “Viruxo Anti-Viral Support” is promoted for conditions that cause the product to be a drug under section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B)]. The therapeutic claims on your website establish that the product is a drug because it is intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. The marketing of the product with these claims violates the Act. Furthermore, your product’s labeling fails to bear adequate directions for its intended use, causing the product to be misbranded under section 502(f)(1) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 352(f)(1). The introduction of a misbranded drug into interstate commerce is a violation of § 301(a) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 331(a).
 
In addition, it is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 et seq., to advertise that a product can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made. See FTC v. Direct Mktg. Concepts, 569 F. Supp. 2d 285, 300, 303 (D. Mass. 2008), aff’d, 624 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2010); FTC v. Nat'l Urological Group, Inc., 645 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1190, 1202 (N.D. Ga. 2008), aff’d, 356 Fed. Appx. 358 (11th Cir. 2009); FTC v. Natural Solution, Inc., No. CV 06-6112-JFW, 2007-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P75,866, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60783, at *11-12 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007). More generally, to make or exaggerate such claims, whether directly or indirectly, through the use of a product name, website name, metatags, or other means, without rigorous scientific evidence sufficient to substantiate the claims, violates the FTC Act. See In re Daniel Chapter One, No. 9239, slip op. 18-20, 2009 WL 516000 (F.T.C.), 17-19 (Dec. 24, 2009) (http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9329/091224commissionopinion.pdf), pet. for review den., 2010 WL 5108600 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 10, 2010).
 
Examples of some of the claims observed on your website www.viruxo.com include:
 
On the main webpage:
  • A headline banner statement: “New Herpes Treatment! Cure for Herpes Outbreaks.”
  • Viruxo Anti-Viral Support … Never Have A Herpes Outbreak Again!”
  • “Viruxo is currently available without a prescription consisting of 14 synergistic ingredients providing your body the ultimate defense against herpes outbreaks.”
  • “America’s #1 Herpes Outbreak Eliminator!”
  • “[Viruxo] starves the viruses by cutting off its nourishment, blocks the virus from replicating….”
 
Through links from the main webpage, at the Viruxo FAQ page:
 
“What is Viruxo?”
  • “Viruxo is the most powerful, no side effect Anti-Viral Immune Support Supplement available without a prescription.”
 
“Is Daily Suppression better than a Topical Herpes Treatment?”
  • “VIRUXO helps to prevent the symptoms as well as the outbreak itself.”
 
“What is in Viruxo?”
  •  “Viruxo is designed to help suppress Herpes Outbreaks, caused by the HSV1 and HSV2 viruses.”
  • Lysine has been shown to retard and slow the growth of certain viruses, including the Herpes Simplex 1&2.”
  • Zinc Sulfate … has [been] shown to directly reduce the frequency, intensity and duration of Herpes outbreaks.”
  • PABA – helps … promote full assumption of important compounds that fight the Herpes Virus.”
  • “Panthothenic Acid – helps in wound healing at the skin level. Promotes blister healing and prevention.”
  • “Thiamin – helps individuals infected with HSV1 and HSV2, maintain adequate Thiamin Levels. Certain viruses deplete Thiamin from the body.”
  • Vitamin B6 – …. Helps maintain a strong immune system, to fight the Herpes Virus.”
 
From the link, “Find Out More Why Viruxo Works So Well” on the main webpage: 
 
“Zinc-Sulfate Blocks Herpes Replication!”
  • “When Specific Zinc ions are delivered to the body, it inhibits the replication of HSV-1 and -2 .... If enough of the virus is inhibited it WILL self destruct.”
 
”“Multiple Potent Immune System Strengthening Ingredients”
  • “Taking Viruxo will boost your immune system giving it the ability to fight off the virus….”
  • “Boosting your immune system with Viruxo will power it to keep an outbreak from happening.”
 
“Build You Skin’s Defenses to Protect Itself!”
  • “Viruxo gives your skin more strength to prevent herpes outbreaks and it [sic] one would occur, it will have the tools to defeat it quickly!”
 
Your website also contains disease claims in the form of Customer Stories. The following are excerpted from the main webpage:
 
  • “I’m a professional trumpet player and have been hampered with Viral sores for most of my life. This made my work painful and also embarrassing. Now, I am free from any more breakouts.”
  • “I have been suffering with genital Herpes for over 5 years ….  I found your product about one year ago. I have been free from the pain, suffering ....”
The claims quoted above are supplemented by the metatags used to bring consumers to your website through Internet searches. The metatags include “The most powerful herpes treatment available without a prescription”, “Herpes Treatment!  Cure For Herpes Outbreaks”, and “Advanced Herpes Treatment”.
 
The claims and metatags listed above establish that your product is a drug, because it is intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. See section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B)]. Your product is not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced uses and therefore, the product is a new drug under section 201(p) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(p)]. New drugs may not be legally marketed in the United States without prior approval from FDA as described in section 505(a) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 355(a)]. FDA approves a new drug on the basis of scientific data submitted by a drug sponsor to demonstrate that the drug is safe and effective.
 
Furthermore, because this product is offered for conditions that are not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners, adequate directions cannot be written so that a layman can use this product safely for its intended uses. Thus, your product’s labeling fails to bear adequate directions for its intended uses, causing it to be misbranded under section 502(f)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(f)(1)]. The introduction of a misbranded drug into interstate commerce is a violation of § 301(a) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 331(a)]. The above violations are not meant to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies in your products and their labeling. It is your responsibility to ensure that products marketed by your firm comply with the Act and its implementing regulations. We advise you to review your website, product labels, and other labeling and promotional materials for your products to ensure that the claims you make for your products do not cause them to violate the Act.
 
You should take prompt action to correct the violations described above and prevent their future recurrence. Failure to do so may result in enforcement action without further notice.
 
The Act authorizes the seizure of illegal products and injunctions against manufacturers and distributors of those products [21 U.S.C. §§ 332 and 334]. 
 
Please notify this office, in writing, within fifteen (15) working days from your receipt of this letter as to the specific steps you have taken to correct the violations noted above and to
ensure that similar violations do not occur. Your response should include any documentation necessary to show that correction has been achieved. If you cannot complete all corrections within fifteen working days, please explain the reason for the delay and the date by which the corrections will be completed.
 
Your response should be directed to Mr. Winston R. Alejo, Compliance Officer, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Florida District Office, 555 Winderley Place Suite 200, Maitland, FL 32751. If you have any questions regarding any issues in this letter, please contact Mr. Alejo at (407) 475-4731.
 
In addition, FTC strongly urges you to review all claims for your products and ensure that those claims are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Violations of the FTC Act may result in legal action seeking a Federal District Court injunction or Administrative Cease and Desist Order. An order also may require that you pay back money to consumers. Please notify FTC via electronic mail at healthproducts@ftc.gov, within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of this letter, of the specific actions you have taken to address FTC’s concerns. If you have any questions regarding compliance with the FTC Act, please contact Richard Cleland at 202-326-3088.
 
Sincerely,
/S/
Mary K. Engle
Associate Director
Division of Advertising Practices
Federal Trade Commission
 
/S/
William A. Correll
Acting Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Food Safety
   and Applied Nutrition                    
Food and Drug Administration
 
/S/
Emma R. Singleton
Florida District Director
Food and Drug Administration                                             
 
 
cc:
6 Lookout Lane
Ocala, Fl. 34482

 

-

Premier Micronutrient Corporation 4/28/11

  

Department of Health and Human Services' logoDepartment of Health and Human Services

Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration
 

New Orleans District
404 BNA Drive
Building 200, Suite 500
Nashville, TN 37217-1003
Telephone: 615-366-7801
Facsimile: 615-366-7802

April 28, 2011

WARNING LETTER NO. 2011-NOL-15

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE
DELIVERY SIGNATURE REQUESTED

Randy L. Looper, President & CEO
Premier Micronutrient Corporation
1801 West End Avenue, Suite 910
Nashville, Tennessee 37203

Dear Mr. Looper:

This is to advise you the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed the web site at the Internet address http://www.bioshieldpill.com in April 2011 and has determined your products, “Bioshield-Radiation® R1” and “Bioshield Radiation® R2,” are promoted for conditions that cause the products to be drugs under Section 201(g)(1) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) Title 21 of the United States Code (USC) § 321(g)(1) [21 USC 321]. Additionally, we observed claims in your press release titled, “Shortages of Potassium Iodide as Radiation Panic Drives Demand,” at the following URL: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/shortages-of-potassium-iodide-as-radiation-panic-drives-demand-118764214.html. The therapeutic claims on your web site and in your press release at the PRNewswire URL establish these products are drugs because they are intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. The marketing of these products with these claims violates the Act.

Examples of the claims observed at http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/shortages-of-potassium-iodide-as-radiation-panic-drives-demand-118764214.html include:

• “The Japanese nuclear crisis has caused a surge in the demand of potassium iodide, causing shortages not only in Japan, but as far away as California, western Canada, and even southeastern Russia. Although potassium iodide does not provide generalized radiation protection because it only shields the thyroid, manufacturers and pharmacies are being bombarded with orders as the radiation hysteria mounts.

A new and superior product, known as the BioShield Radiation Pill, could restore calm to worried residents in affected areas.  Scientists at Premier Micronutrient Corporation have developed this pill as the first ever that is proven to protect DNA from damage caused by radiation.”

• The title, “Shortages of Potassium Iodide as Radiation Panic Drives Demand,” with the subtitle, “Physician Says New BioShield Pill Offering Superior Radiation Protection Is Available”

Moreover, examples of the claims observed on the website, www.bioshieldpill.com include:

On your home page:

• “Ionizing radiation has been officially classified as a carcinogen by both the World Health Organization and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  This is of significant concern because Americans are now exposed to approximately seven times more radiation on average than they were in 1980.

BioShield-Radiation® effectively addresses the major factors in ionizing radiation damage to all cells and tissues.  Potassium iodide only saturates the thyroid gland with non-radioactive iodine so it cannot take up radioactive iodine. Thus, BioShield-Radiation® potentially protects the entire body whereas potassium iodide at best can protect only the thyroid gland. Because BioShield-Radiation® affects the basic underlying causes of radiation damage, it can protect against all radioisotopes from nuclear or other sources, such as iodine, strontium, cesium, uranium, plutonium, xenon, zirconium, etc. Potassium iodide can only protect against radioactive iodine.”

On the webpage titled, “FAQs”:

â–  “What evidence is there that BioShield-Radiation® works?”

 “Numerous animal studies have been performed, proving that the formulations effectively decrease the dangerous levels of mutagenic and carcinogenic free radicals in high oxidative stress states.”

â–  “Have any human trials been conducted to demonstrate that BioShield-Radiation® reduces the risk of cancer in humans?”

 “Dr. Kuefner’s study found that a single dose of BioShield-Radiation taken before radiation exposure provides a significant reduction in DNA double-strand breaks. Such double-strand breaks are among the most significant radiation-induced DNA lesions since they can initiate carcinogenesis (cancer).”

 â– “Who should take BioShield-Radiation®?”

 “4. Individuals working or living in high radon environments.  Radon is an odorless, tasteless and invisible gas produced by the decay of naturally occurring uranium in soil and water.  Radon is a form of ionizing radiation and a proven carcinogen.”

Your products are not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced uses; and, therefore, are “new drugs” under Section 201(p) of the Act [21 USC § 321(p)]. New drugs may not be legally marketed in the U.S. without prior approval from FDA as described in Section 505(a) of the Act [21 USC § 355(a)]. FDA approves a new drug on the basis of scientific data submitted by a drug sponsor to demonstrate the drug is safe and effective.

The above list of violations is not meant to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies in your products and their labeling. It is your responsibility to ensure all of your products and labeling are in compliance with the laws and regulations enforced by FDA. You should take prompt action to correct the violations. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction. 

Please notify this office in writing within fifteen (15) working days from your receipt of this letter as to the specific steps you have taken to correct the violations noted above and to assure similar violations do not occur. Your response should include any documentation necessary to show that correction has been achieved. If you cannot complete all corrections before you respond, please explain the reason for the delay and state the date by which the corrections will be completed.

Please send your reply to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Attention: Rebecca A. Asente, Compliance Officer at the address above.  If you have questions regarding any issues in this letter, please contact Ms. Asente at (504) 219-8818 extension 104.

Sincerely,

/s/

Laurie C. Farmer
Acting District Director
New Orleans District

 

-

Polydna 4/28/11

Federal Trade Commission LOGO                     HHS logo

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HUMAN SERVICES
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
COLLEGE PARK, MD 20740

                                                    
 

WARNING LETTER

CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

Tal Davidson
PolyDNA
2030 Elmwood Ave.
Rochester, NY 14620

Dear Mr. Davidson:                                                                                   

This is to advise you that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has reviewed your websites at the internet addresses, www.polyDNA.com and www.gene-eden.com in March 2011. FDA has determined that the product “Gene-Eden” is promoted for conditions that cause the product to be a drug under section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B)]. The therapeutic claims on your website establish that the product is a drug because it is intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. The marketing of the product with these claims violates the Act. 

In addition, it is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 et seq., to advertise that a product can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.  See FTC v. Direct Mktg. Concepts, 569 F. Supp. 2d 285, 300, 303 (D. Mass. 2008), aff’d, 624 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2010); FTC v. Nat’l Urological Group, Inc., 645 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1190, 1202 (N.D. Ga. 2008), aff’d, 356 Fed. Appx. 358 (11th Cir. 2009); FTC v. Natural Solution, Inc., No. CV 06-6112-JFW, 2007-2 Trade Cas. (CCH) P75,866, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60783, at *11-12 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007).  More generally, to make or exaggerate such claims, whether directly or indirectly, through the use of a product name, website name, metatags, or other means, without rigorous scientific evidence sufficient to substantiate the claims, violates the FTC Act.  See In re Daniel Chapter One,  No. 9239, slip op. 18-20, 2009 WL 516000 (F.T.C.), 17-19 (Dec. 24, 2009) (http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9329/091224commissionopinion.pdf), pet. for review den., 2010 WL 5108600 (D.C. Cir. Dec. 10, 2010).
    
Examples of some of the claims observed on your www.polyDNA.com website include:

"Gene-Eden … [is] a broad range, all natural, antiviral supplement that targets viruses … these viruses include the flue virus, Epstein-Barr Virus (EBV), Cytomegalovirus (CMV), Herpes Simplex (HSV), Varicella Zoster Virus(VZV), Hepatitis B Virus (HBV), Hepatitis C Virus (HCV), or Human Papillomavirus (HPV), among others.”

Your website www.gene-eden.com also contains disease claims in the form of personal testimonials.  Examples of these claims include:  

 “I was diagnosed with chronic Epstein Barr Virus … I have been taking this [Gene-Eden] supplement for 6 months.  I feel so much better.  I have energy again, I don’t wake up exhausted, and I feel good.”
“I was suffering from HPV warts since 2006.  I am very pleased with the way Gene-Eden cleared all the warts and my face is now free of lesions!”
“This product was a miracle supplement for my daughter!  She was diagnosed with a very severe case of mono, which led to viral hepatitis (jaundice, enlarged liver, spleen & gallbladder) … She started taking Gene-Eden about a week after she was released from the hospital and felt much better immediately.”

The claims in the form of personal testimonials quoted above are supplemented by the metatags used to bring consumers to your www.gene-eden.com website through Internet searches. The metatags include “hepatitis,” “HPV,” “papilloma virus,” “human papilloma virus,” “Herpes,” and “Epstein Barr.”

Your product is not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced uses and, therefore, the product is a “new drug” under section 201(p) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(p)]. New drugs may not be legally marketed in the U.S. without prior approval from FDA as described in section 505(a) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 355(a)].  FDA approves a new drug on the basis of scientific data submitted by a drug sponsor to demonstrate that the drug is safe and effective. Your product is also misbranded within the meaning of section 502(f)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(f)(1)], in that the labeling for this product fails to bear adequate directions for use.

The above violations are not meant to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies in your products or their labeling. The unlawful disease treatment and prevention claims made on your websites were too numerous to list in this letter. It is your responsibility to ensure that all products marketed by your firm comply with the Act and its implementing regulations. We advise you to review your websites, product labels, and other labeling and promotional materials for your products to ensure that the claims you make for your products do not cause them to violate the Act.

You should take prompt action to correct the violations described above and prevent their future recurrence.  Failure to do so may result in enforcement action without further notice. The Act authorizes the seizure of illegal products and injunctions against manufacturers and distributors of those products [21 U.S.C. §§ 332 and 334]. 

Please notify FDA in writing, within fifteen (15) working days of the receipt of this letter, as to the specific steps you have taken to correct the violations noted above and to ensure that similar violations do not occur. Include any documentation necessary to show that correction has been achieved. If corrective actions cannot be completed within fifteen working days, state the reason for the delay and the time within which the corrections will be completed. 

Please send your reply to Patricia Clark, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, New York District Office Compliance Branch, Buffalo Office, 300 Pearl Street (HFR-NE340), Buffalo, NY 14202. If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Clark at 716-551-4461 ext. 3168.  

In addition, FTC strongly urges you to review all claims for your products and ensure that those claims are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Violations of the FTC Act may result in legal action seeking a Federal District Court injunction or Administrative Cease and Desist Order. An order also may require that you pay back money to consumers. Please notify FTC via electronic mail at healthproducts@ftc.gov, within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of this letter, of the specific actions you have taken to address FTC’s concerns. If you have any questions regarding compliance with the FTC Act, please contact Richard Cleland at 202-326-3088.

Sincerely,

/s/

Mary K. Engle
Associate Director
Division of Advertising Practices
Federal Trade Commission  

William Correll
Acting Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition 
Food and Drug Administration

Ronald Pace
District Director
New York District Office
Food and Drug Administration

-

Pacific Naturals 4/28/11

  

Department of Health and Human Services logoDepartment of Health and Human Services

Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration
 Los Angeles District Office
19701 Fairchild
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 608-2900

 

April 28, 2011
 
WARNING LETTER
 
Pacific Naturals
2049 North Lincoln Street
Burbank, CA 91504
WL 37-11
 
350 N Glenoaks Blvd., Suite 304
Burbank, CA  91502
                                                                                                                                               
To Whom It May Concern:
 
This letter is to advise you that the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has reviewed your websites at the Internet addresses www.herpeset.com, www.wartrol.com, www.pacificnaturals.com, and www.healthbuy.com. The FDA has determined your firm’s marketing of the products Herpeset and Wartrol, which are offered for sale on your website, violates the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act). As described in more detail below, these products are misbranded under sections 503 and 301 of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 353 and 331]. Herpeset is further misbranded under section 502(j) of the Act in that it is dangerous to health when used in the manner recommended or suggested in its labeling.
 
Labeling statements on your website include, but are not limited to, the following:
 
Herpeset
  • “Genital Herpes Relief by Herpeset”
  • “Now you can get natural homeopathic relief from the painful symptoms of herpes eruptions with Herpeset, a very special homeopathic blend of 9 ingredients, each known . . . to safely reduce the discomfort caused by symptoms of Herpes Simplex Virus”
  • “Homeopathic doctors have been using the separate ingredients in Herpeset™ to treat single symptoms of oral and genital herpes for decades, but our experts in homeopathy have chosen a blend of these natural ingredients to help relieve a wider variety of symptoms in one, easy-to-use spray application.”
  • “Every ingredient was chosen for this unique formula to both alleviate discomfort and help relieve multiple symptoms associated with herpes simplex viral outbreaks.”
  • “Relieves symptoms associated with the herpes simplex virus: oral eruptions, swelling, skin eruptions, and discomfort.”
  • “Genital Herpes Relief”
  • Herpeset Natural homeopathic relief from the painful symptoms of herpes eruptions.”
Wartrol
  • “Wartrol Genital Wart Relief”
  • “With Wartrol Homeopathic Genital Wart Relief, you’ll be able to get relief from Genital Warts symptoms without a prescription.”
  • “Wartrol Homeopathic Genital Wart Relief is a proprietary formula of natural ingredients chosen for their traditional use in homeopathic medicine treating many of the symptoms associated with Genital Warts.”
  • “Just two sprays three times a day get these ingredients into your bloodstream where they can effectively fight the unpleasant symptoms of Genital Warts and help you finally get some relief.”
  • “Genital Wart Relief”
  • “Helps reduce appearance and discomfort of warts on any area of the body.”
  • “With Wartrol Genital Warts Relief formula, you can get relief from the embarrassing and aggravating symptoms of genital warts.”
  • “Homeopathic Genital Wart Relief, you’ll be able to get relief from Genital Warts symptoms without a prescription.”
 
Based on these claims, your products are drugs as defined by section 201(g)(1)(B) and (C) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B) and (C)] because they are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or to affect the structure or function of the body of man. 
                                               
Section 503(b)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. 353(b)(1)] identifies criteria for determining the prescription status of a product. The products listed above are prescription drugs within the meaning of section 503(b)(1) of the Act because they are intended to treat diseases that require diagnosis and treatment by a physician or are intended to provide treatment for symptoms usually caused by an underlying disease process that requires diagnosis and treatment by a physician.
 
Because they may be dispensed only by prescription of a licensed practitioner, these products are misbranded under section 503(b)(4) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 353(b)(4)] in that their labels fail to bear the symbol, "Rx only."[1]  Your marketing of these misbranded products violates sections 301(a) and (k) of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 331(a) and (k)].
 
These products are labeled as homeopathic drugs and have active ingredients measured in homeopathic strengths.[2] The definition of "drug" in section 201(g)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)] includes articles recognized in the official Homeopathic Pharmacopeia of the United States (HPUS), or any supplement to it. Homeopathic drugs are subject to the same regulatory requirements as other drugs; nothing in the Act exempts homeopathic drugs from any of the requirements related to adulteration, labeling, misbranding, or approval. Many homeopathic drugs are manufactured and distributed without FDA approval under enforcement policies set out in the Agency's Compliance Policy Guide entitled, "Conditions Under Which Homeopathic Drugs May be Marketed (CPG 7132.15)" (the CPG). As its title suggests, the CPG identifies specific conditions under which homeopathic drugs may ordinarily be marketed; thus, in order to fall under the enforcement policies set forth in the CPG, a homeopathic product must meet the conditions set forth in the CPG. One of those conditions is compliance with section 503(b) of the Act. Under the CPG, only homeopathic products intended solely for self-limiting disease conditions amenable to self-diagnosis (of symptoms) and treatment may be marketed OTC. Homeopathic products offered for conditions not amenable to OTC use must be marketed as prescription products.[3]
 
Moreover, the labeling for Herpeset includes claims for the prevention, treatment, and cure of genital herpes, as noted above.  A consumer who uses this product as labeled may forgo or delay consultation with a licensed practitioner and treatment as suggested by such licensed practitioner, which can be dangerous not only to the consumer but also to the consumer’s sexual partners. Herpeset is therefore dangerous to health and misbranded under section 502(j) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(j)]. 
 
The violations cited in this letter are not intended to be an all-inclusive statement of violations that exist in connection with your product. You are responsible for investigating and determining the causes of the violations identified above and for preventing their recurrence or the occurrence of other violations. It is your responsibility to assure that your firm complies with all requirements of federal law, the Act and its implementing regulations.
 
You should take prompt action to correct the violations cited in this letter. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in legal action without further notice, including, without limitation, seizure and injunction. Other federal agencies may take this Warning Letter into account when considering the award of contracts. 
 
Within fifteen working days of receipt of this letter, please notify this office in writing of the specific steps that you have taken to correct violations. Include an explanation of each step being taken to prevent the recurrence of violations, as well as copies of related documentation.   If you cannot complete corrective action within fifteen working days, state the reason for the delay and the time within which you will complete the correction. Furthermore, please advise this office what actions you will take to address product that you have already distributed.
 
Address your reply to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; Attn:  Mariza Jafary, Compliance Officer, 19701 Fairchild, Irvine, CA  92612. You may reach Ms. Jafary at (949) 608-2977 if you have any questions about this matter.


 

Sincerely,                                                       
/S/                                                                     
Alonza Cruse 
District Director                                                                                                                                 
Los Angeles District Office 
U.S. Food and Drug Administration                                                                                                                       
 
/S/                               
Deborah M. Autor, Esq.
Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
U.S. Food and Drug Administration

 


[1] The Agency's guidance, "Conditions Under Which Homeopathic Drugs May be Marketed (CPG 7132.15)," states that, in accordance with § 503(b)(1) of the Act, homeopathic drug products offered for conditions that require diagnosis or treatment by a licensed practitioner must bear the prescription legend, "Caution: Federal law prohibits dispensing without prescription."  This guidance was issued by the agency in 1988.  In 1997, Congress enacted the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act (FDAMA); section 126 of FDAMA amended § 503(b)(4) of the Act to require that the label of a prescription drug must bear the symbol "Rx only."
[2] For example, the label for Herpeset includes the ingredients Apis mel 3X, Arsenicum alb 200C, Baptisia 3X, Capsicum 6X, Dulcamara 30C, Echinacea ang 3X, Nitricum ac 200C, Pyrogenium 200C, and Rhus tox 200C.
[3] We note that the CPG also states that, if the HPUS specifies a distinction between nonprescription (OTC) and prescription status of a product based on strength (e.g., 30X), and that distinction is more restrictive than section 503(b) of the Act, the more stringent criteria (i.e., the HPUS criteria) will apply. It follows from this that, if the HPUS specifies a distinction between OTC and prescription status based on strength, and that distinction is less restrictive than section 503(b) of the Act, the section 503(b) criteria will apply regardless of the HPUS distinction.

 

-

Medavir Medical Advances, Inc.

Federal Trade Commission LOGO                     HHS logo

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HUMAN SERVICES
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20740

 

April 28, 2011
 
WARNING LETTER
 
Ms. Stacy Lyles                                           
Medavir Medical Advances, Inc.         
PO Box 174                                           
Windermere, FL  34786
 
502 N Division St
Carson City, NV 89703
 
Dear Ms. Lyles:
 
This letter is to advise you that the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have reviewed your websites at the Internet addresses www.medavir.com, www.medavir.net, and www.taghealth.com. The FDA has determined your firm’s marketing of the products Medavir, ViraBalm, and Vyristic Immune Support, which are offered for sale on your website, violates the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act). As described in more detail below, these products are unapproved new drugs in violation of sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 331(d) and 355(a)] and are misbranded under sections 502 and 502(f)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C §§ 352 and 352(f)(1)]. Your products are further misbranded under section 502(j) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(j)] in that they are dangerous to health when used in the manner recommended or suggested in their labeling.
 
Labeling statements on your website include, but are not limited to, the following:
 
Medavir (topical)
  • MedaVirTM is the #1 rated non prescription herpes treatment because it is proven effective and prevents 98% of all outbreaks (safe topical gel, no pills or side effects).
  • “Apply MedaVirTMjust before the outbreak (burning, itching prodromal phase) and sores never break thru skin”
  • “Any sores that do occur heal 50% faster and are much less severe, results are dramatic.”
  • “Most who use MedaVirTM report future outbreaks stop after just a few treatments, outbreak free for months and even years.”
  •  “MedaVirTM is the only treatment that works. That is why I continue to recommend it to all of my patients with herpes. Most report all outbreaks stop after a few treatment cycles.”
  • MedaVirTM is a safe topical antiviral medication applied directly to the site of infection before and during a herpes simplex outbreak.”
  • MedaVirTM . . . prevents outbreaks and lessens the amount of virus in the body with each successive treatment.”
  •  “Medavir is proposed to help users to become ‘asymptomatic’ to (sic) in that Medavir can eliminate virus on and just below the skin during an outbreak.”
  • MedaVirTM is clinically proven to reduce healing time on active sores to about 72 hours instead of several weeks. Once active sores are treated the future recurrence becomes less severe and frequent. MedaVirTM also provides instant pain relief from sores. Most users report outbreaks stop completely after 2-3 treated outbreaks.”
  • “This is a great time to order MedaVirTM since outbreaks can be completely prevented when this product is applied during the burning, itching prodromal phase. Over 90% of outbreaks do not occur when you apply MedaVirTM at first signs of outbreak.”
  • MedaVirTM is a special patented formulation of Stannous Fluoride (tin bifluoride) manufactured . . . to give our product its effectiveness against Herpes Simplex.”
  • MedaVirTM works using a new proposed mechanism of action to attach and kill the live virus exposed in the skin, so less virus replicates and retreats back into the body for future outbreaks.”
  •  “The ingredients in Medavir were successfully tested in clinical studies proving it is effective against Herpes Simplex.”
  • “Just read the independent research below that proves Medavir kills and stops the herpes virus.”
  • “Clinically proven topical herpes treatment for multiple sore outbreaks”
  • “Stop Future Outbreaks”
  • “Heal Sores in Hours”
  • “Stop herpes simplex outbreaks forever!”
ViraBalm (topical)
  • “ViraBalm Extra Strength . . . is a 100% organic essential oils herpes treatment used as a suppressive therapy. ViraBalm is made from antiviral plant constituents demonstrated effective to inactivate the herpes virus . . . Evidence shows topical application of these products may assist in reduction of viral count.”
Vyristic (oral)
  • “Vyristic Immune System Support Supplement capsule is the most complete and effective daily Herpes supplement ever developed!”
  • “ . . . [F]ound to increase the body’s immune response against herpes viruses, prevent future outbreaks, and provide some resistance to infection.”
  • “Taking one Vyristic capsule daily can be a safe and easy way to help manage outbreaks, without the risk of side effects associated with prescription medication.”
Medavir H-Elimination Kit (contains Medavir, ViraBalm, and Vyristic):
  • “Herpes Elimination Kit“
  • [T]he best combination of . . . Medical Herpes Treatments ever assembled.”
These claims are supplemented by the metatags that you use to bring consumers to your website.  These include “[h]erpes,” “herpes simplex,” “genital herpes,” “herpes sores,” “herpes cure,” and “cure for herpes.”
 
Based on these claims, your products are drugs as defined by section 201(g)(1)(B) and (C) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B) and (C)] because they are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or to affect the structure or function of the body of man. Furthermore, these products are “new drugs,” as defined by section 201(p) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(p)], because they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for their labeled uses. Under sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the Act, a new drug may not be introduced into interstate commerce unless an FDA-approved new drug application (NDA) is in effect for it. Your sale of Medavir, ViraBalm, and Vyristic without approved NDAs violates these provisions of the Act.
 
Genital herpes is not amenable to self‑diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners. “Adequate directions for use” is defined in 21 CFR § 201.5 as “directions under which the layman can use a drug safely and for the purposes for which it is intended.” Because this condition requires the supervision of a practitioner licensed to prescribe drugs, adequate directions cannot be written for them so that a layperson can use your products safely for these uses. Thus, your products’ labeling fails to bear adequate directions for use for these indications, which causes the products to be misbranded under section 502(f)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(f)(1)]. Because your products lack required approved applications, they are not exempt under 21 CFR §§ 201.100(c)(2) and 201.115 from the requirements of section 502(f)(1) of the Act. The introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of these products therefore violates sections 301(a) and (d) of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 331(a) and (d)].
 
The labeling for Medavir, ViraBalm, and Vyristic includes claims for the prevention, treatment, and cure of genital herpes, as noted above.  A consumer who uses these products as labeled may forgo or delay appropriate treatment, which can be dangerous not only to the consumer but also to the consumer’s sexual partners. These products are therefore dangerous to health and misbranded under section 502(j) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(j)].
 
Genital Herpes and Cold Sores
 
Claims Regarding Treatment of Genital Herpes
 
We note that your products are offered over-the-counter (OTC) for the treatment of genital herpes. This condition is not covered by any monograph or ongoing rulemaking under the OTC Drug Review. In addition, we are not aware of any evidence that similarly formulated and labeled products were marketed on or before the inception of the OTC Drug Review, nor has FDA ever proposed that such products be included in the OTC Drug Review.  Your products are therefore not covered by the OTC Drug Review.
  
Claims Regarding Treatment of Cold Sores
 
OTC drug products intended for the topical treatment of fever blisters and cold sores are being evaluated under the ongoing OTC Drug Review. The Tentative Final Monograph (TFM) for this category of products was published in 1990 [External Analgesic Drug Products for Over-The-Counter Human Use; Proposed Rulemaking for Fever Blister and Cold Sore Treatment Drug Products, 55 Fed. Reg. 3370 (Jan. 31, 1990)]. However, FDA considers the use of the term “herpes” alone misleading for products marketed under the OTC Drug Review for treatment of fever blisters and cold sores, because a consumer may associate it with the genital form of herpes. 55 Fed. Reg. at 3373. As stated above, genital herpes is neither covered by any OTC monograph or ongoing rulemaking, nor is it an appropriate OTC indication.
 
To the extent your products are intended for indications covered by the TFM for products for the topical treatment of fever blisters and cold sores, they are also inconsistent with the OTC Drug Review for such products in other respects. For example, according to your website, Medavir contains “a special patented formulation of Stannous Fluoride (tin bifluoride) manufactured . . . to give our product its effectiveness against Herpes Simplex.” This active ingredient has not been evaluated under the OTC Drug Review for products for the topical treatment of fever blisters and cold sores.
 
Furthermore, FDA has determined that there is a lack of adequate data to establish general recognition of the safety and effectiveness of any orally administered ingredients for OTC use to treat or relieve the symptoms or discomfort of cold sores. 21 CFR 310.537(a). Any OTC drug product for oral administration, including your Vyristic product, that is labeled, represented, or promoted to treat or relieve the symptoms or discomfort of cold sores is regarded as a new drug under section 201(p) of the Act and requires an approved NDA in order to be legally marketed. 21 CFR 310.537(b). Additionally, per 21 CFR 310.537(b), any orally administered product that is labeled, represented, or promoted to treat or remove cold sores, and that is not the subject of an FDA-approved application, is misbranded under section 502 of the Act [21 U.S.C. §352].
 
The violations cited in this letter are not intended to be an all-inclusive statement of violations that exist in connection with your products. You are responsible for investigating and determining the causes of the violations identified above and for preventing their recurrence or the occurrence of other violations. It is your responsibility to assure that your firm complies with all requirements of federal law, the Act and its implementing regulations.
 
You should take prompt action to correct the violations cited in this letter. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in legal action without further notice, including, without limitation, seizure and injunction. Other federal agencies may take this Warning Letter into account when considering the award of contracts. 
 
Within fifteen working days of receipt of this letter, please notify this office in writing of the specific steps that you have taken to correct violations. Include an explanation of each step being taken to prevent the recurrence of violations, as well as copies of related documentation.   If you cannot complete corrective action within fifteen working days, state the reason for the delay and the time within which you will complete the correction. Furthermore, please advise this office what actions you will take to address product that you have already distributed.
 
Address your reply to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; Attn: Winston Alejo, Compliance Officer, 555 Winderley Place, Suite 200, Maitland, FL 32751. You may reach Mr. Alejo at (407) 475-4731 if you have any questions about this matter.
 
A description of the new drug approval process can be found on FDA’s Internet website at http://www.fda.gov/cder/regulatory/applications/default.htm. Any questions you may have regarding this process should be directed to the Food and Drug Administration, Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 10001 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD 20993.
 
In addition, it is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 et seq., to advertise that a product can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.  See FTC v. Direct Mktg. Concepts, 569 F. Supp. 2d 285, 300, 303 (D. Mass. 2008); FTC v. Nat'l Urological Group, Inc., No. 1:04-CV-3294-CAP, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44145, at *43-44 (N.D. Ga. June 4,2008); FTC v. Natural Solution, Inc., No. CV 06-6112-JFW, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60783, at *11-12 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007).  More generally, to make or exaggerate such claims, whether directly or indirectly, through the use of a product name, website name, metatags, or other means, without rigorous scientific evidence sufficient to substantiate the claims, violates the FTC Act.  See In re Daniel Chapter One, No. 9239, slip op. 18-20,2009 WL 516000 (F.T.C.), 17-19 (Dec. 24, 2009) (http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9329/091224commissionopinion.pdf.)
 
FTC strongly urges you to review all claims for your products and ensure that those claims are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Violations of the FTC Act may result in legal action seeking a Federal District Court injunction or Administrative Cease and Desist Order. An order also may require that you pay back money to consumers. Please notify FTC via electronic mail at healthproducts@ftc.gov, within fifteen working days of receipt of this letter, of the specific actions you have taken to address FTC's concerns.  If you have any questions regarding compliance with the FTC Act, please contact Richard Cleland at 202-326-3088.
 
 
Sincerely,
/S/ 
Emma R. Singleton
District Director
Florida District Office
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
 
/S/
Deborah M. Autor, Esq.
Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
  
/S/
Mary K. Engle
Associate Director
Division of Advertising Practices
Federal Trade Commission
 

 

-

Master Peace Inc 4/28/11

Federal Trade Commission LOGO                     HHS logo

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HUMAN SERVICES
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20740

April 28, 2011

 

 

VIA UNITED PARCEL SERVICE

WARNING LETTER
CIN-11-124368-14

MasterPeace, Inc. Headquarters
Attn: Karen A. Bodnar
8742 Cleveland Avenue NW
North Canton, OH 44720

Dear Ms. Bodnar:

This is to advise you that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reviewed your website at the Internet address http://www.masterpeaceinc.com in March 2011. FDA has determined that your Disintegrate Formula, Detox Formula, Echinacea/Golden Seal, and Burdock products are promoted for conditions that cause the products to be drugs under section 201(g)(1)(B) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act) [21 U.S.C. § 321(g)(1)(B)]. The therapeutic claims on these websites establish that the products are drugs because they are intended for use in the cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. The marketing of these products with these claims violates the Act. You can find the Act and the FDA’s regulations through links at FDA’s home page at http://www.fda.gov.

In addition, it is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 et seq., to advertise that a product can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made.  See FTC v. Direct Mktg. Concepts, 569 F. Supp. 2d 285, 300, 303 (D. Mass. 2008); FTC v. Nat’l Urological Group, Inc., No. 1:04-CV-3294-CAP, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44145, at *43-44 (N.D. Ga. June 4, 2008); FTC v. Natural Solution, Inc., No. CV 06-6112-JFW, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60783, at *11-12 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007).  More generally, to make or exaggerate such claims, whether directly or indirectly, through the use of a product name, website name, metatags, or other means, without rigorous scientific evidence sufficient to substantiate the claims, violates the FTC Act.  See In re Daniel Chapter One, No. 9239, slip op. 18-20, 2009 WL 516000 (F.T.C.), 17-19 (Dec. 24, 2009) (http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9329/091224commissionopinion.pdf).

Examples of some of the claims observed on your website www.masterpeaceinc.com include:

Disintegrate Formula

On your webpage titled, “HIV-1 Suggested Treatment,” you list this product as part of the treatment along with several other products.

On your website titled, “HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) Suggested treatment, you list this product as part of the treatment along with several other products.

On the webpage titled, “Disintegrate”: 

• “PROPERTIES AND USES: [A]nti-cancer… jaundice, insomnia, asthma, bronchitis…colds, flue [sic] ...anemia…ulcers, cholesterol …radiation poisoning...pain relief…Parkinson's Disease, cancer disorders and tumors...Bells' Palsy...duodenal ulcers…fistula (abnormal tube growth between body parts)…”
• “Blue Violet [an ingredient in your product]…It has a long history as . . .  aiding in the treatment of bronchitis . . . , and has a reputation as an anti-cancer herb.”
• “Celandine [an ingredient in your product]…Recommended for rheumatism and gout sufferers caused by kidney trouble. It is a specific for liver disease such as jaundice, as well as swelling of the gallbladder.”
• “Chickweed [an ingredient in your product]...It has been used on… pleurisy…colds, bronchitis...It also provides relief for rheumatism...kidney trouble, ,....”
• “ Elderberry [an ingredient in your product]  has been used…for relief of headache due to cold…rheumatism, jaundice, kidney problems, epilepsy, and syphilis.”
• “Flax Seed [an ingredient in your product]…It dissolves cholesterol and reduces triglycerides…”
• Sheep Sorrel's [an ingredient in your product]…resolve cancer disorders (as well as tumors)…”
• “Skunk Cabbage [an ingredient in your product]…correction of…epilepsy, Parkinson's disease…”
• “St. John's Wort [an ingredient in your product]…[I]ts properties also treat victims of Bell's Palsy…bronchitis, and bleeding of the lungs.”
• “Tansy [an ingredient in your products] kills parasites, aids duodenal ulcers, it’s used for heart palpitations…”
• “White Oak Bark [an ingredient in your product] is employed for…goiter, to correct bloody urine discharge due to ulcerated bladder...”
• Witch Hazel [an ingredient in your product] helps heal…painful tumors, skin ulcers ….
• Cat’s Claw [an ingredient in your product] …(take to correct) ARTHRITIS, RHEUMATISM, CANCER, GASTITIS…”

Echinacea/Golden Seal

On your webpage titled, “HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) Suggested Treatment,” you list this product as part of the treatment along with several other products.

On the webpage titled, “Echinacea/Golden Seal”:

• “PROPERTIES AND USES: : [A]ntidote for poisons, repairing abscesses,…antibiotic… diabetes.  Known as the herbal penicillin.”
• “Auto-infection…is eliminated by Echinacea [an ingredient in your product]….[H]elps in the following areas...syphilis, gonorrhea, gangrene... sexual impotence…”
• “Golden Seal [an ingredient in your product]...… stomach ulcers...small pox, scarlet fever, enlarged tonsils…colds...It has been found to effectively reduce excess blood sugar in diabetes.”

Burdock

On your webpage titled, “Herpes Suggested Treatment,” you list this product as part of the treatment, along with another product.

On the webpage titled, “Burdock Extract”:

• “BODILY INFLUENCES: Skin diseases of all kinds can be corrected by the use of this herb...painful skin blisters known as "shingles"…”

Detox Formula

On your webpage titled, “Hepatitis Suggested Treatment,” you list this product as part of the treatment along with several other products.

On your webpage titled, “HIV-1 Suggested Treatment,” you list this product as part of the treatment along with several other products.

On your webpage titled, “HPV (Human Papilloma Virus) Suggested Treatment,” you list this product as part of the treatment along with several other products.

On the webpage titled, “Detox”:

• “PROPERTIES AND USES: Antibiotic…high blood pressure...antidote for poisons in the body…cancer and cancer preventative...epilepsy, seizures, cancer disorders and tumors…prevent reoccurrence of cancer...protects the liver from damage caused by viruses...” 
• “BODILY INFLUENCES:…[H]erbalist who used it as the remedy for cancer… [L]owering the blood pressure to normal blood pressure (and keeping it there)…anti-cancer herbs…relief of pain from cancer...epilepsy…cancer of the tongue; skin and all type cancer…tumors; leprosy; cancer; bronchitis; diseased spleen …lower chronic high blood pressure...epilepsy…paralysis…prevents the formulations of certain cancers… protects the liver from damage caused by viruses...”

Your products as noted above are not generally recognized as safe and effective for the above referenced uses and therefore, the products are “new drugs” under section 201(p) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(p)].  Under section 301(d) and 505(a) of the Act (21 U.S.C. §§ 331(d) and 355(a)), a new drug may not be introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce unless an FDA-approved application is in effect for it. The introduction into interstate commerce of unapproved new drugs without approved applications violates these provisions of the Act.

Furthermore, because your Disintegrate Formula, Detox Formula, Echinacea/Golden Seal, and Burdock products are offered for conditions that are not amenable to self-diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners, adequate directions cannot be written so that a layman can use the products safely for their intended uses. Thus, their labeling fails to bear adequate directions for their intended uses, causing them to be misbranded under section 502(f)(1) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 352(f)(1). The introduction of a misbranded drug into interstate commerce is a violation of § 301(a) of the Act, 21 U.S.C. § 331(a).

The above violations are not meant to be an all-inclusive list of deficiencies in your products and their labeling. It is your responsibility to ensure that all of your products are in compliance with the laws and regulations enforced by FDA. You should take prompt action to correct the violations described above. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in regulatory action without further notice, such as seizure and/or injunction. 

Please notify FDA in writing, within fifteen (15) working days of the receipt of this letter, as to the specific steps you have taken to correct the violations noted above and to ensure that similar violations do not occur. Include any documentation necessary to show that correction has been achieved.  If corrective actions cannot be completed within fifteen working days, state the reason for the delay and the time within which the corrections will be completed.

Your response should be directed to Mark E. Parmon, Compliance Officer, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Cincinnati District Office, 6751 Steger Drive, Cincinnati, OH 45237. If you have any questions regarding compliance with the laws and regulations enforced by FDA, please contact him at (513) 679-2700, Ext. 162.

In addition, FTC strongly urges you to review all claims for your products and ensure that those claims are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Violations of the FTC Act may result in legal action seeking a Federal District Court injunction or Administrative Cease and Desist Order. An order also may require that you pay back money to consumers. Please notify FTC, via electronic mail at healthproducts@ftc.gov, within fifteen (15) working days of receipt of this letter of the specific actions you have taken to address FTC’s concerns.  If you have any questions regarding compliance with the FTC Act, please contact Richard Cleland at 202-326-3088.

Sincerely,

/s/        


Mary K. Engle
Associate Director
Division of Advertising Practices
Federal Trade Commission

William Correll
Acting Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
Food and Drug Administration

Teresa Thompson
District Director
Cincinnati District
Food and Drug Administration

 


 

-

Lesa Sverid

Federal Trade Commission LOGO                     HHS logo

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION
BUREAU OF CONSUMER PROTECTION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20580
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 
AND HUMAN SERVICES
FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20740

 

April 28, 2011
 
WARNING LETTER
 
Ms. Lesa Sverid
PO Box 865
East Wareham, MA  02538
 
Dear Ms. Sverid:
 
This letter is to advise you that the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have reviewed your website at the Internet address www.neveranoutbreak.com. The FDA has determined your firm’s marketing of the products O2xygen Force (also referred to as Oxygen Force, OxyForce, and Oxy2), DMSO Cream, DMSO Roll-on, DMSO Cream w/Aloe, and AlkaLife, which are offered for sale on your website, violates the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the Act). As described in more detail below, these products are unapproved new drugs in violation of sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 331(d) and 355(a)] and are misbranded under sections 502 and 502(f)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C §§ 352 and 352(f)(1)]. Your products are further misbranded under section 502(j) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(j)] in that they are dangerous to health when used in the manner recommended or suggested in their labeling.
 
Labeling statements on your website (emphases below appear on the website) include, but are not limited to, the following:
 
DSMO Cream and O2xygen Force (“Package Special”)
  • “The proven, all natural treatment to prevent cold sores and genital herpes outbreaks (HSV 1 and 2).”
  • “Our safe method has successfully prevented herpes outbreaks ....”
  • “Once you start our simple program all outbreaks cause[d] [sic] by herpes simplex 1 and 2 will immediately cease. For over 13 years our program has been effectively treating this virus- preventing all future outbreaks. No other program or product comes even close to the effectiveness of DMSO and Oxy Force (high pH therapy) in the treatment of herpes.”
  • “If our procedure is followed properly all outbreaks will cease. You will remain completely outbreak and symptom free.”
  • “Virtually all who order the Package Special immediately become and remain completely outbreak and symptom free. We guarantee it.”
  • “Get on the fast track to immediate outbreak relief.”
  • “[A] safe, all natural, effective procedure to combat (and for all practical purposes) cure both genital herpes and oral herpes.”
  • “We have 100’s of testimonials from customers who claim a cure for herpes in our treatment.”
  • “The herpes virus exists in cells. If cellular pH is raised to over 7.5 the herpes virus will die. This is an absolute . . . DSMO and O2xygen Force raises cellular pH (oxygen levels) sufficient to stop the herpes virus.”
O2xygen Force (oral)
  • “Taking O2xygen Force as directed will keep [the herpes] virus dormant. When the virus lies dormant it poses no threat. You will become completely outbreak and symptom free and therefore not contagious.”
  • “O2xygen Force has a pH of 13.7. This is what makes O2xygen Force so effective against the herpes virus.” 
  • If you raise cellular pH to over pH 7.5 the herpes virus cannot replicate, cannot activate with the cell. Oxy Force will gradually increase and maintain cellular pH sufficient to prevent replication of the virus.”
DMSO Cream
  • Applied properly DMSO enters the cell and immediately kills the active herpes virus. This is an indisputable fact.”
DMSO Roll-on
  • Applied properly DMSO enters the cell and kills the herpes virus. This is an indisputable fact.”
DMSO Cream w/Aloe
  • Applied properly DMSO enters the cell and kills the herpes virus.  This is an indisputable fact.”
AlkaLife (oral)
  • “The herpes virus thrives in an acidic environment. AlkaLife is part of the program to keep you completely outbreak and symptom free.” 
These claims are supplemented by the metatags that you use to bring consumers to your website. These include “Herpes cure treatment information for std genital herpes and cold sores,” "herpes,” “genital herpes,” “herpes simplex,” “herpes medication,” “herpes treatment,” “natural cure for herpes,” “genital herpes treatment,” “natural cure for herpes symptoms,” and “herpes cure.” 
 
Based on these claims, your products are drugs as defined by sections 201(g)(1)(B) and (C) of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 321(g)(1)(B) and (C)] because they are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease, or to affect the structure or function of the body of man. Furthermore, these products are “new drugs,” as defined by section 201(p) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 321(p)], because they are not generally recognized as safe and effective for their labeled uses. Under sections 301(d) and 505(a) of the Act, a new drug may not be introduced into interstate commerce unless an FDA-approved new drug application (NDA) is in effect for it. Your sale of O2xygen Force, DMSO Cream, DMSO Roll-on, DMSO Cream w/Aloe, and AlkaLife without approved NDAs violates these provisions of the Act.
 
Genital herpes is not amenable to self diagnosis and treatment by individuals who are not medical practitioners. “Adequate directions for use” is defined in 21 CFR § 201.5 as “directions under which the layman can use a drug safely and for the purposes for which it is intended.” Because this condition requires the supervision of a practitioner licensed to prescribe drugs, adequate directions cannot be written for them so that a layperson can use your products safely for these uses. Thus, your products’ labeling fails to bear adequate directions for use for these indications, which causes the products to be misbranded under section 502(f)(1) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(f)(1)]. Because your products lack required approved applications, they are not exempt under 21 CFR §§ 201.100(c)(2) and 201.115 from the requirements of section 502(f)(1) of the Act. The introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of these products therefore violates sections 301(a) and (d) of the Act [21 U.S.C. §§ 331(a) and (d)].
 
The labeling for O2xygen Force, DMSO Cream, DMSO Roll-on, DMSO Cream w/Aloe, and AlkaLife includes claims for the prevention, treatment, and cure of genital herpes, as noted above. A consumer who uses these products as labeled may forgo or delay appropriate treatment, which can be dangerous not only to the consumer but also to the consumer’s sexual partners. These products are therefore dangerous to health and misbranded under section 502(j) of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352(j)]. 
 
Genital Herpes and Cold Sores
 
            Claims Regarding Treatment of Genital Herpes
 
We note that your products are offered over-the-counter (OTC) for the treatment of genital herpes. This indication is not covered by any monograph or ongoing rulemaking under the OTC Drug Review. In addition, we are not aware of any evidence that similarly formulated and labeled products were marketed on or before the inception of the OTC Drug Review, nor has FDA ever proposed that such products be included in the OTC Drug Review.    
 
            Claims Regarding Treatment of Cold Sores
 
OTC drug products intended for the topical treatment of fever blisters and cold sores are being evaluated under the ongoing OTC Drug Review. The Tentative Final Monograph (TFM) for this category of products was published in 1990 [External Analgesic Drug Products for Over-The-Counter Human Use; Proposed Rulemaking for Fever Blister and Cold Sore Treatment Drug Products, 55 Fed. Reg. 3370 (Jan. 31, 1990)]. However, FDA considers the use of the term “herpes” alone misleading for products marketed under the OTC Drug Review for treatment of fever blisters and cold sores, because a consumer may associate it with the genital form of herpes. 55 Fed. Reg. at 3373. As stated above, genital herpes is neither covered by any OTC monograph or ongoing rulemaking, nor is it an appropriate OTC indication.
 
To the extent your DMSO Cream, DMSO Roll-on, and DMSO Cream w/Aloe products are intended for indications covered by the TFM for products for the topical treatment of fever blisters and cold sores, they are also inconsistent with the OTC Drug Review for such products in other respects. For example, according to your website, the active ingredient in DSMO Cream, DSMO Cream w/Aloe, and DSMO Roll-on is dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO). This active ingredient has not been evaluated under the OTC Drug Review for products for topical treatment of fever blisters and cold sores.
 
Furthermore, FDA has determined that there is a lack of adequate data to establish general recognition of the safety and effectiveness of any orally administered ingredient for OTC use to treat or relieve the symptoms or discomfort of fever blisters and cold sores. 21 CFR 310.537(a). Any OTC drug product for oral administration, including your O2xygenForce and AlkaLife products, that is labeled, represented, or promoted to treat or relieve the symptoms or discomfort of cold sores is regarded as a new drug under section 201(p) of the Act and requires an approved NDA in order to be legally marketed. 21 CFR 310.537(b). Additionally, per 21 CFR 310.537(b), any orally administered product that is labeled, represented, or promoted to treat or remove cold sores, and is not the subject of an FDA-approved application, is misbranded under section 502 of the Act [21 U.S.C. § 352].
 
The violations cited in this letter are not intended to be an all-inclusive statement of violations that exist in connection with your products. You are responsible for investigating and determining the causes of the violations identified above and for preventing their recurrence or the occurrence of other violations. It is your responsibility to assure that your firm complies with all requirements of federal law, the Act and its implementing regulations.
 
You should take prompt action to correct the violations cited in this letter. Failure to promptly correct these violations may result in legal action without further notice, including, without limitation, seizure and injunction. Other federal agencies may take this Warning Letter into account when considering the award of contracts. 
 
Within fifteen working days of receipt of this letter, please notify this office in writing of the specific steps that you have taken to correct violations. Include an explanation of each step being taken to prevent the recurrence of violations, as well as copies of related documentation.   If you cannot complete corrective action within fifteen working days, state the reason for the delay and the time within which you will complete the correction. Furthermore, please advise this office what actions you will take to address product that you have already distributed.
 
Address your reply to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration; Attn: Todd Maushart, Compliance Officer, One Montvale Ave., 4th Floor, Stoneham, MA 02180. You may reach Mr. Maushart at (781)587-7486 if you have any questions about this matter.
 
A description of the new drug approval process can be found on FDA’s Internet website at http://www.fda.gov/cder/regulatory/applications/default.htm. Any questions you may have regarding this process should be directed to the Food and Drug Administration, Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, 10001 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring, MD  20993.
 
In addition, it is unlawful under the FTC Act, 15 U.S.C. § 41 et seq., to advertise that a product can prevent, treat, or cure human disease unless you possess competent and reliable scientific evidence, including, when appropriate, well-controlled human clinical studies, substantiating that the claims are true at the time they are made. See FTC v. Direct Mktg. Concepts, 569 F. Supp. 2d 285, 300, 303 (D. Mass. 2008); FTC v. Nat'l Urological Group, Inc., No. 1:04-CV-3294-CAP, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44145, at *43-44 (N.D. Ga. June 4,2008); FTC v. Natural Solution, Inc., No. CV 06-6112-JFW, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60783, at *11-12 (C.D. Cal. Aug. 7, 2007). More generally, to make or exaggerate such claims, whether directly or indirectly, through the use of a product name, website name, metatags, or other means, without rigorous scientific evidence sufficient to substantiate the claims, violates the FTC Act. See In re Daniel Chapter One, No. 9239, slip op. 18-20,2009 WL 516000 (F.T.C.), 17-19 (Dec. 24, 2009) (http://www.ftc.gov/os/adjpro/d9329/091224commissionopinion.pdf.)
 
FTC strongly urges you to review all claims for your products and ensure that those claims are supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Violations of the FTC Act may result in legal action seeking a Federal District Court injunction or Administrative Cease and Desist Order. An order also may require that you pay back money to consumers. Please notify FTC via electronic mail at healthproducts@ftc.gov, within fifteen working days of receipt of this letter, of the specific actions you have taken to address FTC's concerns. If you have any questions regarding compliance with the FTC Act, please contact Richard Cleland at 202-326-3088.
 
 
Sincerely,
/S/ 
Mutahar S. Shamsi
District Director
New England District Office
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
 
/S/                             
Deborah M. Autor, Esq.
Director
Office of Compliance
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
 
/S/
Mary K. Engle
Associate Director
Division of Advertising Practices
Federal Trade Commission

 

-