HBW Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By


FDA Warns Former AAD President For DNA Eye Renewal Claims

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

Ronald Moy, a cosmetic surgeon practicing in Los Angeles and former president of the American Academy of Dermatology, receives an FDA warning letter for unapproved drug claims on his DNA Eye Renewal product, part of the doctor’s DNAEGF Renewal line marketed online. The warning, newly posted to FDA’s website, was one of three that went out to cosmetics players Feb. 12.

You may also be interested in...

FDA Warning Letter Recipients: Where Are Their Claims Now?

A key component of FDA’s enforcement strategy in the cosmetics space is monitoring companies’ websites for overreaching product claims and issuing warning letters accordingly. Examination of past offenders’ current sites and updated claims offers potential visibility into language the agency will and will not tolerate when it comes to promoting skin-care benefits.

FDA's Naughty List This Holiday Season Includes Doctor Skin-Care Brands

December warning letters to firms behind the doctor-founded dr. brandt and epionce skin-care lines cite claims positioning products as treatments for acne, eczema, psoriasis and other skin diseases, as well as collagen-boosting statements and other structure/function claims. FDA issued warning letters to cosmetic companies in at least seven months of 2015.

FDA Stands Firm: Clinical Trials Exploring Structure/Function Effects Need IND

Despite industry's assertion that FDA is unlawfully reinterpreting statutory definitions under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, the agency's republished final guidance maintains that cosmetics evaluated for structure/function effects in clinical trials require Investigational New Drug go-ahead before being transported from one state to another. Anti-aging skin- and hair-care research could be impacted most.

Related Content

Latest Headlines
See All



Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts