BFAD warns company
April 29, 2001 | 12:00am
Bureau of Food and Drugs (BFAD) director William Torres warned the manufacturer of an astringent with cancellation of its license if it commits a third violation of BFAD regulations.
In a recent radio interview, Torres said RDL Pharmaceutical Laboratory in Davao City erred when it marketed the Special RDL Babyface Astringent, a whitening product, without the necessary certificate of registration.
He confirmed that BFAD seized 423 boxes or more than 60,000 bottles of the astringent in August last year at the RDL laboratory which he allowed to be sold allegedly after the product was registered.
However, BFAD documents disclosed that Torres allowed the release of the seized astringent not because it had already been registered but "for reason of financial burden," meaning he granted RDLs appeal for its product to be disposed of to save it from financial difficulties.
The same documents said the BFAD seized the 60,000 bottles not because they were merely unregistered but because of "non-conformity to product specifications," which poses public health risks since they could contain toxic chemicals not indicated in the application as among its active ingredients or that the amount of active ingredients exceeded the level indicated in the application.
The documents did not specify the toxic chemicals that the astringent allegedly contained but only indicated that it was because of this different and questionable formulation that the BFAD rejected RDLs registration application.
Torres, according to one document, said that although he allowed the astringents sale, he prohibited RDL to produce new batches.
In a recent radio interview, Torres said RDL Pharmaceutical Laboratory in Davao City erred when it marketed the Special RDL Babyface Astringent, a whitening product, without the necessary certificate of registration.
He confirmed that BFAD seized 423 boxes or more than 60,000 bottles of the astringent in August last year at the RDL laboratory which he allowed to be sold allegedly after the product was registered.
However, BFAD documents disclosed that Torres allowed the release of the seized astringent not because it had already been registered but "for reason of financial burden," meaning he granted RDLs appeal for its product to be disposed of to save it from financial difficulties.
The same documents said the BFAD seized the 60,000 bottles not because they were merely unregistered but because of "non-conformity to product specifications," which poses public health risks since they could contain toxic chemicals not indicated in the application as among its active ingredients or that the amount of active ingredients exceeded the level indicated in the application.
The documents did not specify the toxic chemicals that the astringent allegedly contained but only indicated that it was because of this different and questionable formulation that the BFAD rejected RDLs registration application.
Torres, according to one document, said that although he allowed the astringents sale, he prohibited RDL to produce new batches.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
Latest
Recommended