If you follow this column and keep a close eye on the cannabidiol (CBD) industry, you know that the FDA deems the sale and marketing of CBD-infused dietary supplements unlawful. This rationale stems from an exclusion clause in the definition of “dietary supplement” under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) that generally disallows the…
If you follow this column and keep a close eye on the cannabidiol (CBD) industry, you understand that the FDA considers the sale and marketing of CBD-infused dietary supplements illegal. Since CBD was investigated and approved as a brand-new drug component– Epidiolex– before CBD was marketed as a dietary supplement, the sale and marketing of these items breaches the FDCA.
Yet, despite the FDA’s position, a growing number of CBD stakeholders have actually been arguing that the Drug Exemption Guideline does not use to their CBD items sold and marketed as dietary supplements because they consist of complete- or broad-spectrum hemp extract, as opposed to CBD isolate, which is the substance that was approved in Epidiolex.
This difference can be connected to a 2001 court choice, Pharmanex, Inc. v. Shalala, which related to the status of lovastatin, a substance discovered in red yeast rice. Red yeast rice had been utilized for healing purposes for thousands of years, the separated compound was approved by the FDA as a drug active ingredient in the treatment of cholesterol.
Following the approval of lovastatin as a drug active ingredient, the FDA challenged the use of this compound in a dietary supplement and dominated. The court held that the lovastatin found in the dietary supplement was not in its natural kind because its manufacturer deliberately selected and used an approach to produce specific levels of lovastatin that were higher than those naturally present in red yeast rice. In addition, the court identified that the item offered as a dietary supplement was a drug due to the fact that it was expressly marketed as the separated lovastatin substance.
The Pharmanex case might determine how the FDA deals with hemp CBD dietary supplements, particularly full- and broad-spectrum hemp extracts.
Hemp, consisting of complete- and broad-spectrum hemp extracts, consists of lots of active substances, including cannabinoids and terpenes. Hemp can be processed in a number of methods, some of which will isolate those active compounds.
Epidiolex is an example of a CBD isolate. Typically, a CBD isolate includes no other substances.
Following the thinking in the Pharmanex case, CBD isolate might be subject to the Drug Exemption Rule, however processed hemp, such as full- and broad-spectrum hemp extracts, may not. Hemp and full- and broad-spectrum hemp extracts are not the very same as a CBD isolate. CBD isolate or processed hemp that consists of isolated and increased concentrations of CBD would be comparable to the separated lovastatin compound in the Pharmanex case, and thus, might only be lawfully offered as drugs.
The parallels in between the Pharmanex case and CBD are hard to disregard. While this legal argument has merit, it is simply speculative. Certainly, to my knowledge, no CBD company has actually yet come up with this legal theory to challenge the FDA’s position in a court of law.
However, it is worth pointing out that in its statement released quickly after the enactment of the Farming Improvement Act of 2018 (the 2018 Farm Bill), the FDA suggested that it may consider such argument versus the application of the Drug Exclusion Rule to full- and broad-spectrum hemp extracts in regulating CBD items:
[P] athways stay available for the FDA to consider whether there are situations in which particular cannabis-derived substances may be allowed in a food or dietary supplement. Such items are generally prohibited to be introduced in interstate commerce, the FDA has authority to release a guideline permitting the use of a pharmaceutical component in a food or dietary supplement.
Certainly, as the company explained in its 2016 draft assistance for brand-new dietary active ingredient notices, the FDA Secretary has the authority to override the Drug Exemption Guideline by providing “a regulation, after notice and comment, discovering that the ingredient, when used as or in a dietary supplement, would be legal under [the FDCA].”
Furthermore, the current introduction in Congress of H.R. 5587, which would exempt hemp CBD from the FDCA’s Drug Exemption Guideline, consequently permitting the sale of hemp CBD as a dietary supplement in interstate commerce, recommends that lawmakers are not pleased with the firm’s current treatment of hemp CBD products and support the industry’s position that CBD products be controlled as dietary supplements.
Only time will inform how the FDA will eventually control CBD products, but something seems certain: if the FDA opts to preserve a strong position and treat all CBD dietary supplements as “drugs,” then the parallels between red yeast rice and hemp CBD will likely be prosecuted to settle this concern.
Nathalie Bougenies practices in the Portland office of Harris Bricken and was called a “2019 Rising Star” by Super Lawyers Publication, an honor bestowed on only 2.5%of eligible Oregon lawyers. Nathalie’s practice focuses on the regulatory framework of hemp-derived CBD (” hemp CBD”) items. She is an authority on FDA enforcement, Food, Drug & Cosmetic Act and other laws and policies surrounding hemp and hemp CBD products.
Love ATL? Let’s make it official.
Sign up for our newsletter.