AHPA’s proposed consumer friendly Prop 65 label warnings gain traction among regulators


- Last updated on GMT

AHPA’s proposed consumer friendly Prop 65 label warnings gain traction among regulators

Related tags Ahpa Proposal California office of environmental health hazard assessment Proposals

Proposals from the American Herbal Product Association (AHPA) to allow more informative warnings for California’s Proposition 65-listed reproductive toxins have been met with interest by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA).

During a meeting on September 25 requested by AHPA, the association’s president Michael McGuffin presented top OEHHA officials with a proposal to allow more informative warnings for Prop 65-listed reproductive toxins to replace the inflammatory and alarming language currently required. Based on this understanding, OEHHA requested AHPA to present specific recommendations on how to change the current regulations.

“Proposition 65 warning language, at least for foods and personal care items, should be informative and as emotionally neutral as possible,”​ said McGuffin. “The AHPA proposal would make warnings for exposures to Proposition 65-listed reproductive toxicants easier to understand for consumers because they instruct that the product should not be used by those populations who could be affected by exposure.”

OEHHA currently requires warnings for reproductive toxins, such as lead, to state that a product contains chemicals “…known to the State of California to cause birth defects or other reproductive harm”​. AHPA is proposing another labeling option that would warn against use by specific populations, such as: “WARNING: Not for use by pregnant or nursing women”,​ or “WARNING: Not for use by children, pregnant or nursing women, or men or women who are trying to conceive”.

“The AHPA language would fully conform to and satisfy the intent of Proposition 65 by ensuring that consumers receive ‘clear and reasonable warning’ relevant to exposures to these substances and would dramatically increase label compliance,” ​added McGuffin.

OEHHA staff indicated significant interest in the AHPA proposal, said the association, and have requested AHPA, with assistance from California legal counsel, Trent Norris of Arnold & Porter, to provide specific recommendations on how to incorporate the label revisions into Proposition 65 regulations.

“AHPA is encouraged that OEHHA staff is receptive to amending the regulations to provide this additional warning option,”​ McGuffin said. “If the regulations are amended, it would be a win for consumers and companies selling food and personal care items in California.”

McGuffin told NutraIngredients-USA that AHPA expects OEHHA to issue a next iteration of a proposed amendment to this rule by the end of the year, possibly sooner.

Related topics Regulation

Related news

Show more

Follow us


View more