Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

FDA Commissioner Signals Enforcement Policy, Advancement of Research for CBD Products

By Allison Fulton & Nazia Khan on March 9, 2020
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
cannabis Image - CBD

On March 5, 2020, the Commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released a statement describing the agency’s continued evaluation of cannabidiol (CBD) products and signaling issuance of an enforcement policy against sellers and marketers of CBD products.

Forthcoming Enforcement Policy. To date, FDA largely has enforced only against companies making egregious health claims, such as treatment for cancer or Alzheimer’s Disease. While FDA will continue to take actions against companies marketing products with aggressive therapeutic claims, FDA Commissioner Hahn reported that the agency will be taking a harder look at products that contain heavy metals, THC (greater than 0.3% on a dry weight basis), or other contaminants. FDA also expressed concerns over products with inaccurate statements regarding CBD content, and those containing undeclared ingredients—an issue that has plagued the dietary supplement industry for years. This is one reason why companies should be carefully vetting their supply chain, including raw material suppliers, contract manufacturers, and contract laboratories.

Moving forward, FDA is evaluating issuing a risk-based enforcement policy that would provide greater clarity on the factors it considers when making enforcement decisions. While the industry would indeed benefit from such clarity, it is unlikely that the policy would differ in material respects from FDA’s current implicit policy, which is demonstrated in its published Warning Letters. The statements from the Commissioner signal increased interest in product ingredients (or omitted ingredients) and marketing specifically geared towards children.

Closing the Gap in Safety Data. In light of the insufficient information FDA has received thus far, FDA also reported that it is re-opening its public docket that it established for its May 2019 public hearing and extending the comment period indefinitely. The docket will have a mechanism for stakeholders to submit information that they consider confidential, increasing the likelihood that companies would actually submit data. Without this safeguard in place, any data that stakeholders submit becomes publicly available upon submitting to the docket. Companies that submit information to the revised docket should be very clear when identifying which information should be kept confidential.

FDA specifically is seeking high-quality data on topics such as:

  • The sedative effects of CBD;
  • The impacts of long-term or cumulative exposure to CBD;
  • Transdermal penetration and pharmacokinetics of CBD;
  • The effects of various routes of administration (g., oral, topical); and
  • The safety of CBD for use in pets and food-producing animals.

This is not to say that the FDA believes that CBD is unsafe; it just cannot, at this time, conclude that unapproved CBD products are safe for use.

While the statement does not provide any clarity on a regulatory path forward for CBD products, it does indicate the agency’s continued concerns over the safety of CBD products and the accuracy of their labeling.

Photo of Allison Fulton Allison Fulton

Allison Fulton is a partner in the Life Sciences and FDA team and is based in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office.

Read more about Allison FultonEmail
Photo of Nazia Khan Nazia Khan

Nazia Khan is an associate in the Corporate Practice Group in the firm’s Washington D.C. office.

Read more about Nazia KhanEmail
  • Posted in:
    Cannabis
  • Organization:
    Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo