Join Now

Member Blog: FDA Cites Multiple Violations for Selling CBD as Supplement, Food, Cosmetic, or Animal Food Ingredient

by Gisela Leon, MS, MBA, Independent Consultant, EAS Consulting Group

The FDA’s position on the use of CBD in dietary supplements and foods is steadfast. In 2021, five warning letters about CBD-containing dietary supplements and foods went out – three based on website reviews and two based on facility inspections. All cited violations relate to pain relief claims. The products are therefore unapproved new drugs. Two warning letters emphasize the FDA’s position that CBD does not meet the definition of a dietary supplement, from which it is excluded due to the authorization for investigation as a new drug. 

In November 2019, the FDA published 15 warning letters in a “catch-all” effort regarding cannabidiol products. The products range from articles sold as dietary supplements, conventional foods, cosmetics, and animal food. The FDA sent out the 15 warning letters to companies in a number of states, including California, Texas, Oklahoma, Colorado, Oregon, New York, Florida, North Carolina, Arizona, and Kentucky based on the content of websites and social media sites. This was not the first time the FDA had sent warning letters regarding cannabidiol [CBD]. The first seven CBD warning letters were issued in March 2019, so attentive manufacturers could have been aware of t the FDA’s position and that enforcement actions might be taken.

In the 2019 warning letters, the FDA states that CBD in products sold as dietary supplements does not meet the definition of dietary ingredients in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (321(ff)(B)(i)(ii)). This provision clarifies that a dietary ingredient cannot be a substance that has been approved as an active ingredient in a drug. The FDA has confirmed that CBD is an active ingredient in the approved drug Epidiolex. 

Products containing CBD and sold as conventional food often worry the FDA even more, because they are often advertised for toddlers and infants. FDA clarified that CBD does not have an authorization as a food additive. Food additives need to be pre-approved by the FDA and there is no such regulation for CBD. CBD also is not a GRAS substance. This is based on the FDA’s review of publicly available data, which shows that CBD is potentially harmful and may cause liver injuries and interact with other drugs. Furthermore, studies in animals have shown that it might impair sexual behavior in males.

Similarly, the FDA states in relevant warning letters that CBD is an unapproved new animal drug because of the disease claims. The products are also adulterated animal foods because there is no animal food additive regulation that authorizes the use of CBD and there is no basis to conclude that CBD is GRAS for use in animal foods.

Besides the illegal status of CBD as a dietary ingredient, the warning letters regard the products as unapproved new drugs, because they claim that CBD cures, mitigates, treats, or even prevents diseases. Most warning letters are very long because the manufacturers cite numerous diseases for which CBD might be helpful. CBD is often depicted as a “cure-all.” Some of the popular disease claims involve pain relief, anti-inflammatory, diabetes, acne, anxiety, depression, and cancer. For example, one warning letter cites 45 diseases. Simultaneous to being unapproved new drugs, all products are regarded as misbranded drugs. 

Most 2019 warning letters were signed by three FDA compliance directors from Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Veterinary Medicine, and Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. In some of the earlier warning letters, the FDA also involved FTC – Federal Trade Commission – because of unsubstantiated claims. Both agencies are concerned that some of the efficacy claims may not be substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence.

There are clearly more than 27 companies in the market selling CBD. My thought is that the FDA has picked some of the worst offenders with respect to claims to establish impressive examples. Throughout the years in articles and press notifications, the FDA has always stated the regulatory position that CBD does not meet the definition of a dietary ingredient. This position has been challenged by industry and is a controversial topic. Some plaintiffs’ lawyers have initiated class-action lawsuits on the basis that clients were harmed by buying an illegal product and paying too much for it. It appears that the FDA is currently only enforcing against CBD products with disease claims. So far, the FDA has not written warning letters solely because a dietary supplement uses CBD. All of the mentioned warning letters could have been written to any dietary supplement making obvious disease claims.

So, what can be learned from the FDA’s actions? The first and most important step for manufacturers would be to “clear” all web pages, social media pages, and third-party referrals of disease statements. A second approach should be to not use CBD as a food ingredient or as an animal food ingredient. As a regulatory strategy, this may buy some time until the controversy about the legality of use in dietary supplements is clarified. For dietary supplements – in a conservative regulatory approach – a next step could be not using CBD as a dietary ingredient, because it is an approved drug. 

A possible alternative legal ingredient is a full spectrum hemp extract which contains all hemp components – not just isolated CBD. Hemp-derived ingredients are eligible for use as dietary ingredients by virtue of being “botanicals.” However, hemp-derived substances must submit a New Dietary Ingredient notification 75 days prior to first marketing the hemp supplement. A less conservative regulatory approach for dietary supplements could be to wait and see what the FDA decides under the pressure from industry and consumers. Hopefully soon, the FDA will clarify the legality of use in dietary supplements.


Gisela Leon brings in over 33 years of experience in international labeling. She is well-experienced in USA labeling requirements of food, dietary supplements and cosmetics, in European food laws and multi-language labeling. As a regulatory consultant, she focuses on a concise review process, having reviewed hundreds of labels for U.S. compliance and helped international products to come into compliance with U.S. regulations. Her international labeling background allows her to point out differences or similarities with other countries.

After receiving her Master’s degree in Food Technology Engineering, Ms. Leon received her DGQ Audit-Specialist Certification from the German Institute for Quality, and her Master’s in Business Administration from George Mason University. For over 20 years she worked at Schöller Lebensmittel GmbH & Co KG as Director of Quality Management and Labeling Compliance. Ms. Leon speaks English, German, and French.

EAS Consulting Group, as part of the Certified Group of companies, merged with Food Safety Net Services, (FSNS), to become the global leader in testing and regulatory solutions for the FDA and USDA regulated industries. 

EAS’ network of 200 independent advisors and consultants enables us to provide comprehensive consulting, training and auditing services, ensuring proactive regulatory and quality compliance for food, dietary supplements, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, cosmetics, tobacco, hemp and CBD.

The merger of FSNS (FSNS.com) with the Certified Laboratories group of companies, (certified-laboratories.com), has created a leading, national testing  and regulatory consulting  platform. EAS can assist with your regulatory and quality requirements and challenges, while offering access to a robust scope of testing services to meet your organization’s sophisticated needs. 

From regulatory strategy, auditing, training, FDA inspection preparation, 483 & Warning letter remediation, quality system implementation, labeling compliance, preparation of technical submissions such as GRAS, Food Additive Petitions, DMFs, NDIs, 510(k)s and more; to FSMA compliance, expert witness services and due diligence assessments, EAS offers the expert knowledge and experience your company requires to ensure compliance through accurate and timely assistance. With our vast expertise in FDA’s and USDA’s policies and enforcement, EAS is the proven choice for assistance with product testing and other regulatory and quality consulting solutions. easconsultinggroup.com 

 

Member Blog: GMPs – A Way Ahead for Hemp and CBD Firms

by Charlotte Peyton, Independent Consultant, EAS Consulting Group

The hemp industry is the marijuana industry’s half-sister. Both are variations of the plant cannabis sativa and both were made illegal in 1937 with the passing of The Marijuana Tax Act. Flash forward to the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (known as the 2018 Farm Bill) that was signed into law by Congress on December 20, 2018. One year later, The USDA issued interim regulations that entitled Establishment of a Domestic Hemp Production Program for the cultivation of hemp on October 31, 2019. Both were huge steps forward for public access to hemp and hemp products. FDA legalized the growing of hemp in states with a state-mandated hemp program and removed hemp and its derivatives from Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Schedule I status and the U.S. Domestic Hemp Program aims to approve cultivation plans issued by states and Indian Tribes. 

Even so, then FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb issued a statement hours after the signing of the Farm Bill reiterating that “Congress explicitly preserved the agency’s current authority to regulate products containing cannabis or cannabis-derived compounds under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and section 351 of the Public Health Service Act.” 

Still today, two years later and counting, FDA only permits CBD products submitted as an Investigational New Drug (IND) Application as a pharmaceutical and there remains only one such accepted CBD product, Epidiolex, manufactured by G.W. Pharma. All other CBD products are illegal for interstate shipment.

In-state production and sales may be a different story, provided that state has a mandated hemp program. In those cases, provided state law is followed, production and sales are legal and protected, but the minute products cross state lines, they become the jurisdiction of the federal government and, more specifically, the FDA. At least 47 states have enacted legislation to establish hemp production programs or allow for hemp cultivation research.

Section 10113 of The 2018 Farm Bill states that (c) Nothing in this subtitle shall affect or modify:

(1) the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.);

(2) section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262); or 

(3) the authority of the Commissioner of Food and Drugs and the Secretary of Health and Human Services- ‘‘(A) under- ‘‘(i) the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.); or ‘‘(ii) section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262); or ‘‘(B) to promulgate Federal regulations and guidelines that relate to the production of hemp under the Act described in subparagraph (A)(i) or the section described in subparagraph (A)(ii).” 

The mission of the FDA is “to ensure the safety, effectiveness, and security of human and veterinary drugs, vaccines and other biological products for human use, and medical devices.” As such, FDA categorizes every product for sale in the U.S. which is either ingested or applied to a human or animals into categories. That means hemp-derived CBD products will have to lawfully fit into one of those categories, however, while there has been positive movement towards the legal sale of hemp products on the USDA cultivation side, the FDA has authority over foods and dietary supplements, and the FDA’s position is that the addition of hemp/CBD to a food or dietary supplement is “violative.” In a Consumer Update statement revised on November 25, 2019, the FDA clearly stated that “it cannot conclude that CBD is generally recognized as safe (GRAS) among qualified experts for its use in human or animal food.”  

That being said, FDA has indicated it would be open to review of safety data for submission of a cannabinoid as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) for Food or as a New Dietary Ingredient (NDI) in a supplement as the lack of any federal regulation runs the potential of putting people at risk. That has sent the industry scurrying to design and initiate studies in the hopes of demonstrating levels of safety that meet FDA’s satisfaction. 

In the meantime, those currently operating in states where hemp manufacturing is legal, must ensure Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) are adhered to closely. Should the FDA ever allow hemp products with CBD to be sold in the future, a manufacturer’s ability to demonstrate understanding and compliance with GMPs will be critical. Each FDA regulated industry has its own set of GMPs for the development and implementation of quality systems. 

  • 21 CFR 117, Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventative Controls for Human Food
  • 21 CFR 507, Current Good Manufacturing Practice, Hazard Analysis, and Risk-Based Preventative Controls for Food for Animals
  • 21 CFR 111, Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Packaging, Labeling, or Holding Operations for Dietary Supplements
  • 21 CFR 210, Current Good Manufacturing Practice in Manufacturing, Processing, Packing, or Holding of Drugs; General
  • 21 CFR 211, Current Good Manufacturing Practice for Finished Pharmaceuticals
  • FDA Draft Guidance for Industry, Cosmetic Good Manufacturing Practice, June 2013

As the industry waits in the hopes that FDA will come on board with those states that have already legalized CBD’s use in products, it important to take the necessary steps to develop GMP protocols and quality systems as part of documented Standard Operating Procedures and record-keeping that those procedures are being followed, products are being tested and those tests are being validated. 

Ensure as you begin to develop or strengthen your GMP programs that you do so with a full understanding of the requirements set forth in 21 CFR 111. Whether these programs are designed in-house or with the assistance of an outside consulting firm, ensure your GMPs are specific to your manufacturing procedures as opposed to a stock one-size-fits-all program. A reputable consulting firm with demonstrable expertise in FDA regulations and in helping to develop these GMPs is a good place to start, one that listens to your questions and concerns before providing you their stock answer. A good consulting firm can walk you through your unique processes.   

Ensure your quality systems are robust and documented, including your demonstrations that your cGMPs are being followed. 


Charlotte Peyton supports EAS Consulting Group CBD and hemp clients as well as that of dietary supplements and pharmaceuticals. As an independent consultant, she assists with projects ranging from startup through manufacturing and support. Her expertise includes quality, regulatory and management, method development, and method validation for FDA regulated drug, dietary supplement, and bioanalytical samples. She has extensive experience in writing validation protocols, reports, and SOPs and assists with implementation of stability programs and report writing for finished products.

EAS Consulting Group, a member of the Certified family of companies, is a global leader in regulatory solutions for industries regulated by FDA, USDA, and other federal and state agencies. Our network of over 150 independent advisors and consultants enables EAS to provide comprehensive consulting, training, and auditing services, ensuring proactive regulatory compliance for food, dietary supplements, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, cosmetics, tobacco, hemp, and CBD. 

This site uses cookies. By using this site or closing this notice, you agree to the use of cookies and our privacy policy.