FDA needs to revise its constricted approval process to provide "an efficient, effective and timely process for dealing with health claims for foods and beverages," GMA told the agency in comments on the FDA Modernization Act of 1997, adding that the First Amendment prohibits FDA from acting as a "national censor." Both GMA and NFPA urged the agency to be more flexible in accepting authoritative statements to support health claims by a wider group of "federal scientific bodies." Currently, only two groups can make authoritative statements: a federal government scientific body with responsibility for public health protection or research directly related to nutrition (such as the National Institutes of Health or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) or the National Academy of Sciences and its subdivisions.
E-BOOK SPECIAL REPORT
42 Best Package Designs
Sign up to receive timely updates from our editors and download this e-book consisting of our editors' picks of most notable package designs. Updated for 2014!
The Massachusetts legislature is considering a chemical warning label bill patterned after California's Proposition 65. Testifying in opposition before the state Joint Natural Resources and Agriculture Committee, GMA and NFPA both argued strongly against the bill.
To best profit from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), North American manufacturers should be aiming at one product, one package and one label for U.S., Mexican and Canadian markets, according to the North American Alliance, which includes the trade associations GMA, Food and Consumer Product Manufacturers of Canada and ConMexico.
"For certain IV bags, we're looking to replace PVC. That would happen gradually, on a product-by-product basis because of the long period of time required for regulatory submission and approval," according to Deborah Spak, senior manager in communications for Baxter Intl.
Some time after a computer software code is written, but before it is commercially launched, it undergoes a period of beta testing. During this period, select users try the program out, spot bugs in it, figure out function shortcuts, criticize the program's performance and let the developer know what they like and don't like about the software.
The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, considered the most influential court of appeals on regulatory matters, essentially rejected FDA's high-handed approach to denying health claims deemed lacking "significant scientific agreement." It faulted the agency for failing to define "significant scientific agreement" and for refusing even to consider allowing manufacturers to make some label claims as long as they're mitigated by an FDA-approved disclaimer statement.