Sunscreens that have been available in Europe and other foreign markets for years remain banned from U.S. stores because of a backlog in the federal bureaucracy.
The ingredients that make the sunscreen superior have been awaiting approval — or any sort of decision — from the Food and Drug Administration for at least 12 years. There are currently eight such ingredients stuck in the system.
Without access to the ingredients, consumers may be blocked from buying the sunscreens that provide the most effective protections against harmful rays.
Congress has a plan to break the 12-year backlog: The House Energy and Commerce Committee on Monday is looking at legislation that would expedite the FDA’s approval process for sunscreen ingredients. Should the panel approval the measure, it would put the bill one step closer to passage.
A companion version of the House bill is pending with the Senate’s Health Committee.
The legislation aims to improve on the federal government’s latest attempt to make itself more nimble in keeping up with sunblock technology: a 2002 procedural change from the FDA that the agency hoped would speed up its approval process.
But without a single ingredient being approved since then, advocates say it’s time for another try.
“FDA’s goal was to create a more streamlined process; it just didn’t work out that way,” says a staff member of the Public Access to SunScreens Coalition. “Everyone — melanoma researchers, the community, manufacturers, patients, even the FDA — everyone agrees the current situation is not working. When you combine that with the increasing rates of skin cancer, it’s a serious public-health concern.”
At stake is more than sunburns: Skin cancer is the most common form of cancer in the United States. more than 2 million cases are diagnosed each year, many of which could be prevented by protecting the skin from sun exposure, according to the American Cancer Society.
Congressional advocates hope they can improve the FDA’s existing procedure without upending the entire system.
Under current law, if an ingredient is on the market in another country for five years, it may go through a process to be determined eligible by the FDA. An advisory committee of experts then weighs in on the safety and effectiveness of the product, and the agency makes the final determination as to whether it is approved.
The Sunscreen Innovation Act makes two primary changes to this process. First, it would institute an eight-month deadline for the FDA to make a decision, replacing a current review process that lacks a mandatory end date. Second, the bill would no longer require the FDA to issue a regulation every time it wants to approve an ingredient.
The FDA declined to comment on the bill, but a spokesperson said the agency has “prioritized reviewing the safety and effectiveness of additional sunscreen ingredients as quickly as possible given the agency’s resources.”
This frustration has boiled over to Capitol Hill, with matching House and Senate bills to address the problem. The House version being considered Monday was introduced by Republican Ed Whitfield and Democrat John Dingell. The Senate version came from Democrat Jack Reed and Republican Johnny Isakson.
With backing from both parties, advocates are cautiously optimistic about the bills becoming law, but they recognize that bipartisan support is no guarantee of passage — particularly in the current gridlocked environment.
“Trying to predict what Congress is going to do is kind of like having a perfect March Madness bracket,” the sunscreens coalition staff member said. “But I will say there has been tremendous bipartisan, bicameral support.”
What We're Following See More »
The Signal app is fast becoming the new favorite among those who are obsessed with the security and untraceabilty of their messaging. Just ask the Democratic National Committee. Or Edward Snowden. As Vanity Fair reports, before news ever broke that the DNC's servers had been hacked, word went out among the organization that the word "Trump" should never be used in their emails, lest it attract hackers' attention. Not long after, all Trump-related messages, especially disparaging ones, would need to be encrypted via the Snowden-approved Signal.
The Republican Study Committee may lose several members of the House Freedom Caucus next year, "potentially creating a split between two influential groups of House conservatives." The Freedom Caucus was founded at the inception of the current Congress by members who felt that the conservative RSC had gotten too cozy with leadership, "and its roughly 40 members have long clashed with the RSC over what tactics to use when pushing for conservative legislation." As many as 20 members may not join the RSC for the new Congress next year.
"The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Monday issued emergency authorization for a Zika diagnostics test from Swiss drugmaker Roche, skirting normal approval channels as the regulator moves to fight the disease's spread." Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journal reports that a new study in Nature identifies "about a dozen substances" that could "suppress the pathogen's replication." Some of them are already in clinical trials.
According to 37 newly released audits, "some private Medicare plans overcharged the government for the majority of elderly patients they treated." A number of Medicare Advantage plans overstated "the severity of medical conditions like diabetes and depression." The money has since been paid back, though some plans are appealing the federal audits.
"GOP leaders and House Democrats are already laying the groundwork for a short-term continuing resolution" on the budget this fall "that will set up a vote on a catch-all spending bill right before the holidays." As usual, however, the House Freedom Caucus may throw a wrench in Speaker Paul Ryan's gears. The conservative bloc doesn't appear willing to accept any CR that doesn't fund the government into 2017.