Abstract:
This paper critically evaluates the self-certification system proposed by the Natural Health Products Bill 2011 for the regulation of natural health product efficacy claims. The decision to regulate efficacy claims is fundamentally agreed with, but the paper contends that the proposed system is inconsistent with the principles of the Bill. Two major arguments are provided to support this contention. Firstly, the risk-based rationale for regulation is significantly undermined by the very narrow definition of natural health product. Secondly, the history of non-compliance with regulations prohibiting therapeutic claims suggests that a system of self-certification is not appropriate. It is concluded that if the principles of the Bill are to be upheld, these arguments and various other factors discussed by the paper cannot be ignored when formulating regulations.
