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: Hemp Production, Testing, and the FDA

by Charlotte Peyton, Independent Consultant, EAS Consulting Group

The new U.S. Domestic Hemp Program will approve cultivation plans issued by states and Indian Tribes and can approve plans submitted by producers that live in a state or Tribe where plans are not already submitted and where hemp production is not forbidden. According to the USDA website, 28 states and Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands have had their hemp plans approved by the USDA, 11 states have plans under review, 5 states have obtained a license from USDA, 5 are electing to continue under the 2014 Hemp Pilot Program, Colorado is resubmitting their plan, Alaska is drafting their plan, and Idaho is awaiting state legislation. What is surprising is that some of the biggest hemp growing states, such as Montana (44,910 acres), Colorado (20,330 acres) and Kentucky (18,910 acres) do not yet have their plans approved by the USDA. Montana is choosing to operate under the 2014 Hemp Pilot Program, Colorado is resubmitting their plan to USDA and Kentucky’s plan is still under review.

While there has been a rush to plant hemp by farmers eager to cultivate a high-priced crop with enormous demand, there has not been the same rush to set up extraction facilities. This is a critical step for the manufacture of cannabidiol (CBD) raw material. Hemp must be dried properly before extraction or it will rot so cultivating a plant that is susceptible to rot without an assigned material manufacturer (extractor) is risky. The impact of the differences between hemp and typical crop cultivation for farmers and the lack of extraction companies has been disastrous for some farmers. Hemp must be monitored for THC levels as the crop grows because any hemp harvested with an amount of THC over 0.3% must be destroyed. This is completely different from soy or cotton cultivation. And when the cost of clones to plant in a large field is included, the potential loss increases dramatically. 

Then there are the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) hemp/CBD product issues. 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.”  There is speculation that dietary supplement FDA rules are imminent but until the FDA makes those rules public, sales of finished product is still illegal.

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.” Numerous warning letters have been issued by FDA to CBD manufacturers for disease claims about their products. Whether sold as dietary supplements, conventional foods, cosmetics, animal food, so of the violative disease claims include pain relief, anti-inflammatory, diabetes, acne, anxiety, depression, and cancer. For example, one Warning Letter issued by FDA on November 22, 2019, cites 45 diseases. FDA has stated that CBD in products sold as dietary supplements does not meet the definition of a dietary ingredient 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. FDA has approved CBD as an active pharmaceutical ingredient in the drug Epidiolex. Although the FDA is only taking enforcement action on companies making products that contain disease claims, once the disease claim is made the FDA will cite other regulatory enforcement issues. Companies not making disease claims have not been targeted for enforcement yet. Several states, including New York and Oregon, are following the FDA’s lead by banning some products containing CBD, mostly infused food. 

In addition to these challenges, there have been a series of class-action lawsuits filed against hemp/CBD manufacturers. These are based on the fact that the FDA has stated hemp and CBD is illegal in food and dietary supplements. The lawsuits claim the plaintiffs suffered economic loss because the products were not dietary supplements according to the FDA. The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals is allowing the consumer injury requirement necessary to sustain a complaint to be satisfied by the allegation that an FDA product is “illegal.” This ruling may open the floodgates for more class-action lawsuits.

All testing of hemp must be performed by a laboratory with a Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) license. This is because hemp that does not meet the less than 0.3% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) does not fall under the industrial hemp definition and is still under the jurisdiction of the DEA. A list of U.S.-based licensed laboratories is available on the DEA website and also on the USDA website. Pesticide screening is one of the tests dictated for hemp in the US Domestic Hemp Program. Ten pesticides have been approved for use on hemp by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  The latter is a notable step since the EPA could not do this before the removal of hemp from The Controlled Substances Act. Nine of the allowed pesticides are biopesticides and one is a conventional pesticide.

Then there is the matter of CBD as either a full-spectrum oil vs. an isolate. Unlike marijuana flower which is a very popular product, hemp flower is very rarely sold at the retail level. Full-spectrum oil is extracted from the plant, and depending on the solvent used, produces an oil with the same, or close to the same, naturally occurring chemicals from the plant. The oil, therefore, includes all the cannabinoids present along with any terpenes, lipids, or other compounds present in the plant. Full-spectrum oil is a botanical extract and is a dark thick oil. Isolate is produced by separating the constituents of the full spectrum oil by molecular weights or boiling points to have very pure chemicals in the 95%+ purity range. CBD isolate is a white crystalline substance and bears the greatest resemblance to synthetic raw material and at its purest form cannot be distinguished as coming from a plant in the dirt or a synthesized chemical. Full-spectrum oil bears the greatest resemblance to a botanical dietary supplement. It remains to be seen what the FDA will allow in the future.

I believe in this industry and I am rooting for the pioneers who have taken all the risk thus far, but am concerned about the lack of understanding over FDA’s authority particularly as this industry aims to transition to a regulated future. Most don’t understand FDA’s purview or don’t think it applies to them or their products. When that day comes, bringing the hemp industry into compliance with federal regulations will be challenging. 

Hemp pioneers deserve to benefit from their labor and the risk they have taken. For those hemp product companies that do not think compliance is worth the effort or cost, there are many FDA compliant human food, animal food, dietary supplement, pharmaceutical, or cosmetic companies that are waiting to take your business…


Charlotte Peyton supports EAS Consulting Group hemp, CBD and hemp clients as well as that of dietary supplement 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. www.easconsultinggroup.com

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