FDA PREEMPTION OF PROP. 65 DENTAL MERCURY RULES: CALIF. CONSIDERING APPEAL
This article was originally published in The Gray Sheet
FDA PREEMPTION OF PROP. 65 DENTAL MERCURY RULES: CALIF. CONSIDERING APPEAL of a recent court ruling that FDA requirements for dental mercury preempt California's Proposition 65 warning requirements for the product. Judge Rudi Brewster of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Califomia found that "Proposition 65's warning requirements, when imposed on dental mercury or products containing dental mercury, are different from, or in addition to, specific [Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act Medical Device Amendments] requirements applicable to dental mercury or products containing dental mercury, and consequently are preempted." Prop. 65 requires warnings for dental mercury because the state has deemed it a reproductive toxicant.
You may also be interested in...
The WHO’s new "living guideline" against remdesivir’s use in hospitalized patients notwithstanding, some key opinion leaders in India see a role for the antiviral, but underscore that COVID-19 is still in its infancy and all repurposed therapies for the disease still have a long way to go. They also see the US remdesivir studies as more robust.
Join us for a brief audio tour around the past week's major global biopharma industry developments, in this podcast version of Scrip's Five Must-Know Things.
A recent Department of Health and Human Services proposal to review regulations every 10 years may mean good things for the device industry, said David Hoffmeister, partner, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati.