We write mostly about decisions in cases, with those mostly coming from judges. Occasionally, we will also comment on articles, amicus briefs, and official government pronouncements. We cannot remember the last time we explored a press release. In today’s political environment, speculation about what is contained in documents that purportedly exist but we cannot see
What follows is a guest post by John Feldman, a partner in Reed Smith’s Entertainment and Media Industry Group. John closely follows all things Federal Trade Commission and approached us when he saw the FTC weighing in a group of products that falls under the first word of our title. We have weighed in before on FDA’s regulation of homeopathic drugs, but FDA is not the only regulator in town.
As always, our guest posters are entitled to all of the credit, and any blame, for their efforts.
“Eye of newt, and toe of frog. For a charm of powerful trouble, Like a hell-broth boil and bubble.” Hey, if it works for you, more power to ya.
That’s the FTC’s attitude toward homeopathic drugs. Following up on a homeopathic drug workshop in conducted in 2015, the staff at the FTC is apparently convinced that generally there is no medical basis for most claims on homeopathic drug labels and marketing materials. The FTC recognizes that thousands if not millions of people use and find value in homeopathic drugs. And it may be that many if not most of the users of such products know that the science underpinning the products is shaky at best and possibly non-existent, but the FTC believes that many people purchasing homeopathic drugs do not even understand what homeopathy is.
Enter: The FTC Enforcement Policy Statement on Marketing Claims for OTC Homeopathic Drugs.