Is the low figure an indication that little progress is being made with NHP licensing?
Not across the board. For example, since September 2007, the rate of licensing for Compendial NHPs (i.e., licenses granted to NHPs with ingredients for which the health claims have already been proven and entered into a Compendium) has risen sharply, resulting in 83% of reviewed submissions being licensed. In the Non-compendial category, Transitional DIN products and TPD Category IV products have both caught up with their submission rates, resulting in closing rates of 98% and 70% of received submissions respectively. So there are some optimistic trends. However, in two important Non-compendial categories – Traditional and Non-traditional products – licensing shows steady progress over time but the overall rates are low, with only 38% and 40% of submissions processed. It would be interesting to know why these rates are low. Traditional NHPs are those products that have health claims based only on proof of 50 consecutive years of usage within a traditional medicine system, such as Tradi
Related Questions
- My child has been receiving special education for many years but is making little to no progress with his/her reading, writing, and/or math. What should I do?
- What is the timetable from licensing to operation should Progress Energy decide to build a nuclear plant?
- Is the low figure an indication that little progress is being made with NHP licensing?
