Last month, UK regulators held two important meetings on the future of the country's new food regulations, with many companies hoping to get much-needed clarity on the CBD situation. I found out that there is.
CBD featured prominently on the agenda of both the Food Standards Agency (FSA) Board meeting and the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) two-day meeting held on 17 and 18 September. .
Despite this, CBD was barely mentioned at FSA meetings until questions were raised by the industry. More importantly, although the ACNFP agenda on Wednesday the 18th was almost entirely devoted to discussion around CBD, no industry participants were invited to attend, and the discussion was closed to the public. It was maintained.
The UK CBD industry has shrunk by 40% in the past five years, according to figures from the Cannabis Trade Association (CTA), and frustration among operators over a lack of transparency continues to grow.
Industry bodies are seeking further engagement and insight into how the ever-changing goalposts are calculated, but the FSA is prepared to work more closely with industry to ensure progress is made after repeated delays. This seems to show that they recognize the urgent need.
what happened?
A central issue still looming over the UK CBD industry is consumer guidance from the FSA that the recommended 'Acceptable Daily Intake' (ADI) for CBD products is just 10mg.
In October last year, long after the Novel Foods process was underway and CBD companies had spent millions of dollars putting their applications together, the FSA made the shocking announcement that it was lowering the recommended daily intake from 70mg to 10mg. I did it.
This means that many single-dose products already in production, such as CBD drinks, capsules, and gummies, will contain levels of CBD that exceed the new standards, requiring product labels to be changed or reformulated. Yes, the application may be invalidated.
However, the “new scientific evidence” on which this decision was based remains opaque and is otherwise understood to be based on toxicological studies of a single application.
It also remains unclear whether this means applications that do not meet this new 10mg limit will be allowed to proceed to the novel food process.
In May, the first two applications to issue 'active safety assessments' were revealed by the FSA, both of which complied with this strict limit.
With little certainty surrounding CBD regulation, the lack of transparency on the part of ACNFP is causing further unnecessary pain to an already frustrated and struggling industry.
The CTA attended the FSA meeting and submitted numerous questions to the ACNFP meeting (invitation only) to drive home this issue on behalf of its members.
One-size-fits-all approach
In its submission to ACNFP, CTA argues that this restriction, which is based on studies of isolated CBD, ignores full-spectrum CBD products that contain other beneficial compounds.
“This restriction is based solely on studies of isolated CBD, rather than the full-spectrum and distilled products that make up a significant portion of the market…and when you apply this to the industry as a whole, there are critical differences between product types. It will be overlooked.”
CTA argues that this one-size-fits-all approach ignores scientific evidence supporting higher safety limits.
They went on to cite “hypocrisy” in the regulatory process after being told that each CBD application would be judged on its own merits.
“The imposition of a blanket ADI of 10 mg is inconsistent with this position.”
“How can ACNFP justify setting standards based on one data set, ignoring other scientific evidence? Research shows that much higher ADI limits can be safely applied. have been shown, but these findings have been largely ignored.
“This discrepancy is causing confusion and frustration within the industry, as companies are held to standards that may not reflect all available scientific evidence.”
Improved transparency
Not only are ACNFP meetings closed to the public, but almost all discussions surrounding the CBD are classified as “reserved business,” which refers to sensitive matters such as commercially sensitive information or national security issues. This classification is limited to topics.
This means that the minutes of these meetings are also redacted or have limited public access.
CTA will explain what specific studies were used to determine this ADI, why other datasets were not considered, and how this ADI may change based on new evidence. We are calling for more transparency as to whether or not this is the case.
“Industry has a right to access the scientific overview and conclusions on which this decision was based. Ultimately, any full application of ADI must be supported by comprehensive and transparent evidence. there is.”
He also argued for preferential treatment and greater regulatory support for some large companies, pointing to inconsistencies within the process.
Hemp Hound's Cefin Jones echoed this sentiment, telling Business of Cannabis: “While the lack of transparency across the ACNFP and FSA is deeply concerning, it is not surprising given the advances in new foods to date.”
He said that even though the Financial Services Agency has still issued guidance stating that all businesses must certify consumer sales before February 13, 2020. He added that he believes companies that have not brought products to market are in the process.
“Despite the Financial Services Agency removing companies from the process for failing to demonstrate sales by the deadline, we already know that companies were able to circumvent that requirement.”
some degree of optimism
At the FSA meeting on the same day, the CTA raised these issues with the Board, highlighting the disillusionment of businesses seeking to operate within the legal framework and the inefficiency of the current regulatory framework.
In response, FSA Board Chair Professor Susan Jebb requested that the CTA formally write to her with suggestions on how to expedite the Novel Foods process for CBD products.
The Council reportedly recognized the urgency of the situation and indicated that the target date for accelerating the regulatory framework could be January 2025.
